What is the legal defense that may be raised when the defendant believes the plaintiff contributed to their own injuries or damages?

The concept of contributory negligence is rooted in the legal principle that if a plaintiff is found to have contributed to their own injuries or damages, it can diminish or eliminate their right to recover damages from a defendant. In jurisdictions that adhere to this doctrine, any degree of fault on the part of the plaintiff—no matter how minimal—can result in a complete bar to recovery.

This means that if a plaintiff failed to act with the reasonable care expected in a given situation, and this failure directly contributed to the harm they suffered, the defendant may successfully argue that the plaintiff should not be awarded any damages. This principle is particularly important in cases where the actions of both parties may be scrutinized, as it underscores a fundamental tenet of negligence law: that all parties bear some responsibility for their actions.

In contrast, other options such as comparative negligence allow for damages to be awarded based on the proportion of fault attributed to each party, and therefore do not fully bar recovery even if the plaintiff is partially at fault. The assumption of risk refers to situations where a plaintiff knowingly engages in risky behavior, acknowledging the potential hazards involved, while a liability waiver typically involves contractual agreements where one party agrees to relinquish their right to sue. Each of these concepts serves a