Register | Lost your password?

CaseBriefs

Li v. Yellow Cab Co. of California

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Citation. 13 Cal. 3d 804, 532 P.2d 1226, 119 Cal. Rptr. 858, 1975 Cal.

Brief Fact Summary. Defendant hit Plaintiff when Plaintiff attempted to cross three lanes of oncoming traffic in order to enter a service station. Both parties were negligent. The trial court held that Plaintiff was barred from recovery by her own contributory negligence.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The doctrine of comparative negligence assesses liability in direct proportion to fault.


Facts. Plaintiff attempted to cross three lanes of oncoming traffic in order to enter a service station. Defendant’s driver was speeding, ran a yellow light and struck Plaintiff’s car. Both parties were negligent. The trial court held that Plaintiff was barred from recovery due to her own contributory negligence. Plaintiff appealed.

Issue. Should the affirmative defense, contributory negligence, give way to a system of comparative negligence, which assesses liability in direct proportion to fault?

Content Type: Brief


Comments are closed.