If some item of value gets damaged by a group of playful children, each child is apt to blame the actions of one or more of the other children. Adults do not behave that much differently, if someone has suffered a loss, due to the effects of an accidental action. Consequently, if any adult presses charges by filing a personal injury claim, a courtroom becomes the sight where a judge and jury must decide who is to blame.
An attorney for the defense might introduce contributory evidence.
In a personal injury case, contributory evidence shed’s a different light on the plaintiff’s allegations. It suggests that the plaintiff’s own actions contributed to occurrence of the damaging incident. Sometimes an action not taken by the plaintiff qualifies as a contributing factor.
Who might favor the introduction of contributory evidence?
If could be a driver that hit a pedestrian that had run between two cars before running into the street. The pedestrian would have been jay-walking. For that reason, the guilty driver would want to highlight the pedestrian’s/plaintiff’s careless and neglectful action. Hence, the driver would hope to be charged a lower fee for his or her inability to avoid hitting a pedestrian.
Another driver might get charged with responsibility for a collision after sneaking past a red light. That same driver could get hit with a lower payment for the plaintiff’s damages, if the driver’s attorney could show that the plaintiff/victim had failed to wear a seatbelt.
A property owner might welcome the introduction of a piece of contributory evidence, if someone had tripped on that owner’s piece of property. Perhaps an injury lawyer in Edmonton for the owner/defendant could show that the plaintiff’s footwear failed to serve as a sturdy form of support. Proof of that fact could be used to weaken the plaintiff’s case.
The head administrator at a hospital might delight in mention of contributory evidence, if a former patient had charged the hospital with medical malpractice. Perhaps the hospital’s attorney discovered that the patient failed to obey a doctor’s orders. Maybe the patient chose to sit-up just 3 hours after having undergone a spinal tap.
If the doctor had told the same patient to remain flat for at least 4 hours, following completion of the spinal tap, the patient’s actions could have contributed to the development of back problems. In that case, the evidentiary material would not support the patient’s allegations. Consequently, the plaintiff/patient would not receive an anticipated award, in order to compensate for the incident-associated medical costs.
In a personal injury case, a consumer’s failure to read and follow the instructions on a product’s package could defeat a charge against the product’s manufacturer.