Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Comparative Negligence In Ohio: Prospective Or Retrospective Application, Beth Whitmore
Comparative Negligence In Ohio: Prospective Or Retrospective Application, Beth Whitmore
Akron Law Review
Under Revised Code § 2315.19, the contributory negligence of the plaintiff is no longer an absolute bar to recovery. Only where a plaintiff's fault is greater than that of all defendants combined is that plaintiff precluded entirely from recovery. Thus under the new Ohio statute, the possibility of recovery for the negligent plaintiff is significantly enhanced while at the same time liability exposure of the defendant is proportionately enlarged. It is therefore of critical importance to determine whether such an alteration in the relative rights of litigants is constitutional.
Judicial Application Of Ohio's Comparative Negligence Statute, Michael J. Olah, Paul F. Meyerhoefer
Judicial Application Of Ohio's Comparative Negligence Statute, Michael J. Olah, Paul F. Meyerhoefer
Akron Law Review
In the case of Wilfong v. Batdorf the Ohio Supreme Court reexamined the issue of the retroactive application of Ohio's comparative negligence statute. Ohio's statute abolishing the defense of contributory negligence in a tort action was passed with an effective date of June 20, 1980, and the court faced the task of deciding whether comparative fault measurements could be used in an action arising prior to the effective date of the statute, but not coming to trial until after the effective date of the act. Previously the court had the opportunity to examine this issue in the case of Viers …