Strategies, Challenges, and Answers

You are here: Home / Archives for Contributory Negligence

LexisNexis Names Nevada Insurance Law As A Top Insurance Law Blog For 2011

November 21, 2011 by

The Advisory Board of the LexisNexis Insurance Law Community has selected Mills & Associates' Nevada Insurance Law as one of the nation’s Top Insurance Law Blogs for 2011.  The Advisory Board described what it saw in the winning blogs. The Top Blogs contain some of the best writing out there on insurance law.  They contain a wealth of information for the insurance law community with timely news items, practical information, expert analysis, practice tips, frequent postings, and helpful … [Read more...]

Filed Under: Alternative Dispute Resolution, Attorney's Fees, Bad Faith, Bankruptcy, Collateral Source, Comparative Fault, Contribution, Contributory Negligence, Court System, Criminal Convictions, Damages, Defaults & Default Judgments, Direct Action, Dram Shop, Duties to the Insured, Evidentiary Inferences, Expert Testimony, Federal Court, Fee Shifting, Finality, Five-Year Rule, Good Faith Settlements, Good Samaritan Law, Legal Research, Liability, Liens, Limitation of Actions, Medical Payments, Minor's Compromise, Motions for Summary Judgment, Offers of Judgment, Offsets, Parental Liability, Policy Interpretation, Rebuttable Presumptions, Removal, Res Ipsa Loquitur, Short Trial, Sovereign Immunity, Spoliation of Evidence, Stacking Policy Coverages, Statutes of Limitations, Strategies to Consider, Subrogation, Survival Actions, Technology, Title and Registration of Autos, Traffic Citations, Trial Strategy, UM/UIM, Vicarious Liability, Wrongful Death Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

Got Questions?

August 3, 2010 by

These posts on the Mills & Associates Nevada Insurance Law blog are published to provide useful insights on Nevada insurance law to our clients and other subscribers. Many times the topics are suggested by recent case law, or issues raised by litigation. As part of our ongoing effort to provide both timely and helpful information, we invite all our readers to submit issues which they would like to see addressed in future blog posts. Likewise, please submit questions concerning prior … [Read more...]

Filed Under: Alternative Dispute Resolution, Attorney's Fees, Bad Faith, Bankruptcy, Collateral Source, Comparative Fault, Continuing Legal Education, Contribution, Contributory Negligence, Court System, Criminal Convictions, Damages, Defaults & Default Judgments, Direct Action, Dram Shop, Duties to the Insured, Evidentiary Inferences, Expert Testimony, Federal Court, Fee Shifting, Finality, Five-Year Rule, Good Faith Settlements, Good Samaritan Law, Legal Research, Liability, Liens, Limitation of Actions, Medical Payments, Minor's Compromise, Offers of Judgment, Offsets, Parental Liability, Policy Interpretation, Rebuttable Presumptions, Removal, Res Ipsa Loquitur, Short Trial, Sovereign Immunity, Spoliation of Evidence, Stacking Policy Coverages, Statutes of Limitations, Strategies to Consider, Subrogation, Survival Actions, Technology, Title and Registration of Autos, Traffic Citations, Trial Strategy, UM/UIM, Vicarious Liability, Wrongful Death Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Res Ipsa Loquitur And Comparative Fault

March 10, 2009 by

If there is insufficient evidence to prove a conventional case of negligence, creative Plaintiff’s attorneys will search around for an alternative theory of liability under which their client can recover.  One of those alternative theories is res ipsa loquitur.  Res ipsa loquitur is a Latin phrase that means “the thing speaks for itself”.  In a res ipsa loquitur case, the plaintiff’s attorney might argue that if it looks like negligence and feels like negligence, it must be negligence.  The … [Read more...]

Filed Under: Comparative Fault, Contributory Negligence, Negligence, Res Ipsa Loquitur Tagged With: , , , ,

Joint & Several Liability / Comparative Fault

February 11, 2008 by

Nevada has adopted a plan of modified comparative fault.  There is no recovery if the Plaintiff's liability is greater than the liability of the defendant.  N.R.S. 41.141.  On a 50/50 split of liability between Plaintiff and Defendant, Plaintiff will recover but the damages will be reduced by 50%. Several Liability is the rule but there are some very serious exceptions to that rule.  N.R.S. 41.141.  If the Plaintiff is without fault, the rule is Joint & Several Liability. Buck v. … [Read more...]

Filed Under: Comparative Fault, Contributory Negligence, Joint & Several Liability