Li v. Yellow Cab Co., 13 Cal.3d 804, 119 Cal.Rptr. 858, 532 P.2d 1226 (1975).

Case Summary

Facts: Li (P) was hit by a cab driver for Yellow Cab Co. (D) as she was crossing three lanes of traffic to enter a gas station. The cab driver had been driving too fast and had run a yellow light. Li sued for damages arising from the accident. The trial court entered a judgment barring damages for P on the grounds that she had been contributorily negligent. P appealed.

Issue: Can opposing parties in a negligence claim both be held liable under the doctrine of comparative negligence? Is secondary implied assumption of the risk subsumed by comparative negligence?

Holding and Rule: Yes and yes. Under the doctrine of comparative negligence, liability is based on the relative percentage each party’s fault if both parties are negligent.

Notes: As a matter of public policy, the doctrine of comparative negligence is preferable to an “all or nothing” rule from the point of view of logic, practical experience and fundamental justice.

Related posts:

• American Motorcycle Association v. Superior Court - Case Brief
• Simblest v. Maynard - Case Brief
• Roberts v. Ring - Case Brief

Lawnix

Index of Cases