before the jar was completely out, the display began to shake, and Pat stopped pulling out the jar.
She was about to push it back into the stack when Bob, another shopper, accidentally bumped his
cart into Pat. This caused her hand to jolt forward, and the entire display fell over. Both Pat and
Bob were knocked down and suffered glass cuts. Pat sues Dan's for negligence in designing and
constructing the display. Pat has also named Bob as a defendant.
4. If Dan's claims Pat was comparatively negligent, and the jurisdiction maintains a rule of pure
comparative fault, which of the following statements is accurate?
A. Because Pat was an invitee to whom Dan's owed a duty of protection, any carelessness on
Pat's part will not reduce her recovery.
B. Because Pat recognized the danger of pulling out a jar from the stack, she cannot recover
whether or not her action was unreasonable.
C. If Pat failed to use reasonable care for her own safety, and her conduct was a substantial
factor in causing the display to fall, the jury may reduce her award.
D. If Pat failed to exercise reasonable care for her own safety, and her conduct was a substantial
factor in causing the display to fall, Pat can only recover if her fault was less than that of Bob
Pure comparative negligence allows a Plaintiff to recover a percentage of the damages even
if her own negligence exceeded the defendants.
5. Same facts as in Question 4. If Dan's claims Pat assumed the risk of injury, and this is a
"secondary" assumption of risk type of case, which of the following statements is accurate?