Perspective
Oct. 25, 2013
A new name for the primary assumption of risk
Whether an injured plaintiff "assumed the risk" is not very helpful for determining whether there is a valid primary assumption of risk defense under California law. By John A. Hribar
Every lawyer knows something about the "assumption of risk" defense in negligence cases. Why? Probably because it has a catchy name (as far as legal doctrines go). And probably because "assumption of risk" seems to perfectly describe the logic behind the legal rule. Unfortunately, there is often confusion rather than clarity, because whether an injured plaintiff "assumed the risk" is not very helpful for determining...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In