Pure Contributory Negligence in Virginia and How It Affects Your Case

When someone is negligent or violates the law and hurts you as a result, you typically can pursue a claim for compensation from that individual.  In fact, in some cases, you can pursue a claim against their employer. Negligent companies and even government agencies can also be responsible for injuries they cause to others.

Unfortunately, Virginia follows a legal doctrine that can make pursuing compensation more difficult. It’s called pure contributory negligence, and it is the rule only in a very small number of U.S. states. 

You need to understand how pure contributory negligence affects your damage claim, and you need a local Virginia attorney who knows how this doctrine works — and how to make a compelling case under its framework — to help you get justice when you are hurt.

At Monge & Associates, we help injured people throughout Arlington and across Virginia understand their legal options and build claims designed to withstand fault disputes.

Give us a call today or contact us online to schedule a free consultation with an Arlington injury lawyer to learn how we can help you, or read on to learn how contributory negligence can affect your claim. 

What Is Pure Contributory Negligence?

Contributory negligence is a legal doctrine that says if you, the victim, are partly responsible for causing your own injuries, you are not allowed to pursue a claim against other parties who also played a role in causing you harm.

For example, if you were involved in a car accident that was 95% the fault of another driver but you were 5% at fault, contributory negligence rules would prevent you from recovering compensation for your losses.

Very few states follow this rule. Most follow either pure comparative negligence or modified comparative negligence rules. 

• Under pure comparative negligence rules, you can pursue a claim against someone who hurt you even if they were only 1% or 2% responsible for the incident. You simply recover compensation based on the portion of the blame attributed to the defendant. 
• In modified comparative negligence states, you can pursue a claim as long as you were not either 50% responsible for your accident or 51% responsible for your accident (depending on the state). Again, your compensation is based on the percentage of fault attributed to the other party.

Because Virginia is one of just a few states that follow contributory negligence rules instead, it is harder to obtain compensation in this state than in many others.

Virginia’s Contributory Negligence Laws

Virginia courts have repeatedly affirmed the contributory negligence rules and the restrictions on the ability to recover compensation when you share blame for an accident.

Virginia’s contributory negligence rule dates back to a case called Baskett v. Banks, 45 S.E.2d 173, in which the court stated, “No person is entitled to recover from another for damages which have been occasioned by his own act or his own neglect.”

The courts have also held that it typically should be up to the jury to determine if the plaintiff played a role in causing their own accident. 

Still, insurance companies routinely try to use contributory negligence to deny claims or to pressure victims into accepting less money than their claim should be worth by raising the possibility they’ll recover no compensation at all in court.

Understanding Virginia’s Last Clear Chance Doctrine

While Virginia does make it more difficult to obtain compensation, it is far from impossible — especially as there are other rules that exist in the state that give injured victims more opportunity to recover damages even if they may have played some role in causing the accident. 

The last clear chance rule is one of the most important of those rules. The last clear chance doctrine puts the burden to prevent the accident on the defendant in certain specific cases. For example, a defendant can be held responsible for an injury even if a victim contributed to causing an accident if:

• The victim put themselves in a position of peril or risk but is not able to remove themselves from the threat of harm, and the defendant saw, or should have seen, the victim, recognized the peril, and could avoid harming them by exercising reasonable care.
• The victim put themselves in a position of peril or risk of injury and could potentially remove themselves, but is not aware of the risk, and the defendant saw the victim, realized or should have known the victim was in peril, and had the time and ability to avoid the accident using reasonable care. 

For example, if a pedestrian illegally crosses a road and gets their foot caught in a storm drain grate that they can’t free themselves from, an oncoming driver who sees (or reasonably should see) the victim but didn’t take reasonable steps to avoid hitting them can be held liable. 

Essentially, the way this rule is applied, if a defendant has the last clear chance to stop an accident, has a reasonable opportunity to do so, and fails, then the defendant can be held liable for the resulting accident despite any potential role the victim may have played.

Talk With an Arlington Injury Lawyer Today

Because of Virginia’s contributory negligence law, it’s very important to have an experienced local attorney who knows how to work within this legal framework to maximize your chances of getting the compensation you deserve.

Monge & Associates is here to help accident victims make strong claims and fight for full and fair compensation. We have recovered millions on behalf of victims in both out-of-court settlements and court verdicts, and we will go to work from day one to prove the defendant was at fault and should pay for your losses.

Give us a call or contact us online today to schedule your free consultation and learn how we can help. We don’t charge legal fees unless we win, and your case valuation is always free.