Tort review Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Tort review - Case Study Example Koz negligence, the prevailing comparative negligence guidelines and concept of swimmers’ legally supported to claim damages since their proportion of contribution was less than 50% 1. Under The New York modified comparative negligence rule, an injured party may recover damages only if he/she is less than 50% at fault for the injury or damages. However, the recovered amount may be reduced in proportion to the degree that the injured party was at fault. For instance, if the Peter Koz is determined to be 80% at fault and the group of swimmers is determined to be 20% at fault, the swimmers can collect for the damages because they were less than 50% at fault. However, Peter Koz insurance company might only offer to pay for 80% of your damages2. The injured party had upper hand in negotiating with the insurance company and a settlement was reached to compensate them. If the settlement could not be reached, the courts could make the final determination of comparative negligence4. The swimmers were entitled to damages as evidence indicated that there contribution to the case was 25% which is less than the 50% bar rule. Peter Koz will not prevail because his contribution is above 50% and will compensate the swimmers the damages as estimated at