Unformatted text preview: would not have been injured but for the stairway that was not properly lighted. CHP argues that even though a duty is owed to Davenport, it was Davenport that used the dark stairway to climb the stairs, instead of using the alternate safer route, that Davenport was aware of. CHP did not breach the duty, as it was Davenports responsibility when knowingly using a dark stairway. CHP agrees that Davenport was injured. But, CHP did not breach the duty, that was responsible for Davenports injury. Davenport knowingly used a dark stairway, instead of a safer route and assumed the risk of danger. Conclusion : Yes Davenport may recover for negligence in a assumption of risk case, because it was determined that the negligence was committed equally by Davenport and CHP. Davenport may seek compensatory damages for medical and lost wages, that will be awarded at a 50% due to his equal involvement of the negligence. Negligence cases do not qualify for punitive damages....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 03/28/2012 for the course BLAW 280 taught by Professor Ng during the Spring '11 term at CSU Northridge.
- Spring '11
- Business Law