Question

Do you believe the Maryland Legislature should change from contributory negligence to comparative negligence and more importantly, why?

And also, if your answer is yes, which type---pure or modified---would you choose, and why?

Lastly, what was your impression of the oral arguments in the Court of Appeals?

Answer 1

There are only 5 jurisdictions in US that still have contributory negligence while the other jurisdictions have implemented the comparative negligence doctrine.

Comparative negligence doctrine reduces the damage amount of the plaintiff’s recovery in a case of negligence-based claim. Contributory negligence bars the plaintiff from any amount of recovery in any negligence-based claim, even if he is 1% or more guilty.

Maryland should switch from contributory jurisdiction to comparative because of the following reasons:

• Contributory doctrine is very harsh and inhumane
• Contributory doctrine has become outdated and more then 90% other countries have replaced it
• This doctrine does not give a fair judgment

Maryland should definitely switch to comparative jurisdiction. This jurisdiction is of 2 types:

• Pure: plaintiff is allowed to recover damages from defendant subtracting the amount of damage for which he is responsible
• Modified: plaintiff will be liable for no recovery is he is found to be equally or more guilty than the defendant

In my views, to be totally fair in negligence-based cases, the Maryland jurisdiction must adopt the modified comparative negligence doctrine. This doctrine gives equal status to both plaintiff and defendant and based on the degree of responsibility of both parties, gives its decisions. If the plaintiff is guilty, then he should not be given relief just because he is on the plaintiff’s side, posing as a victim.

2. Oral arguments happen between the judge and the lawyer where the lawyer gives the brief and his party’s arguments for the case. Both the lawyers are given equal time to present their case. In my views, this is a good way to solve disputes and deliver judgments as in oral arguments, the judge is fully active during the arguments and can ask questions that can make his decision making fair and complete.