About Assumption of Risk in Negligence Cases

Originally published by robertslawfirm.

Did you know that if you are hurt while engaging in activities you know could be hazardous, you may not be able to hold someone else liable? Under “assumption of risk,” you take the responsibility for being injured when you voluntarily engage in conduct knowing the particular risks involved. For example, skiers are well aware that they may fall and break a leg. And, someone who decides to run across a freeway is well aware of the likelihood of being hit by a car. For the assumption of risk doctrine to apply, a plaintiff must have actual knowledge of the risk involved in the activity they are undertaking. If there are unknown dangers, assumption of risk does not apply. For example, if you are getting on an amusement park ride that flips you upside down, you assume the risks of being turned upside down. However, if a bolt comes loose and you are thrown from the ride, that is not an assumed risk. The defense of assumption of risk is very fact-intensive, and there is no uniform outcome. Traditionally, if the court determines that you are responsible for your injuries, you would not collect any damages. Because of the harshness of this rule, most states do not recognize assumption of risk as a defense. Instead, they allow defendants to raise the defense of either contributory negligence or comparative negligence. Or, they will not accept assumption of risk as a complete bar to recovery – and will reduce your award for […]

The post About Assumption of Risk in Negligence Cases appeared first on Roberts & Roberts.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2cOf1iO
via Abogado Aly Website