If you fail to act with reasonable care, and your failure to act with care results in an injury to another party than you will be considered negligent under the eyes of law. Negligence can be of two types:
1. If you do not do something that a reasonable person would do to prevent harm. Similarly, if you had a duty to act and you fail to act in a reasonable manner thus causing harm to somebody.
2. If you fail to act with due care that a reasonable person would have taken to prevent harm.
Under both these circumstances, you can be sued for your negligence. There are two main kinds of laws dealing with negligence the comparative negligence law and pure comparative negligence law.
What are the comparative and Pure Comparative Negligence Laws?
Both comparative and pure comparative negligence laws find their application when plaintiff is also partly responsible in causing his own injuries by being negligent in his or her behavior. For example, in the McDonalds Coffee Case, the old woman was partly responsible in causing her injuries. The negligence was shared between the old women and McDonalds by 20% and 80% respectively.
The good news is that even if you are partly negligent you still get compensation for your injuries. There are two main laws governing this type of compensation:
Comparative Negligence Law
The Comparative Negligence Law compensates the damages by first determining the percentages that each party is responsible, and then each party is made to pay the other party compensation for the damages that were incurred due to its negligence.
Pure comparative Negligence Law
Under the pure comparative Negligence Law, the plaintiff receives the exact total amount of the damages that he or she suffered, minus the amount that he or she contributed to the injury. This is what happened in the McDonald Coffee case. As the women were responsible for 20% of the injuries she suffered, she received compensation for 80% of the total expenses that she suffered due the accident.