suem@ihopb.UUCP (Sue McKinnell) (09/30/85)
I've been reading the sealbelt vs airbags articles and have noticed that many people believe that although it is a good idea to hold nonusers of seatbelts liable for their extra injuries caused by not using the seatbelts, it is impossible to do so. Well, back in 72-73 when I was taking law school courses, there were already cases where people had not been fully compensated for automobile accident injuries because they were held to be contributorily negligent for not using seatbelts. These cases were torts (civil) cases and were not rare. -- Sue McKinnell ...!ihnp4!ihopb!suem IH 6N226 x5313
king@kestrel.ARPA (10/03/85)
In article <715@ihopb.UUCP>, suem@ihopb.UUCP (Sue McKinnell) writes: > I've been reading the sealbelt vs airbags articles and have noticed > that many people believe that although it is a good idea to hold > nonusers of seatbelts liable for their extra injuries caused by not > using the seatbelts, it is impossible to do so. Well, back in 72-73 > when I was taking law school courses, there were already cases where > people had not been fully compensated for automobile accident injuries > because they were held to be contributorily negligent for not using > seatbelts. These cases were torts (civil) cases and were not rare. > -- > > Sue McKinnell > ...!ihnp4!ihopb!suem > IH 6N226 x5313 I'd be interested in seeing the citations. An Illinois court rejected contributory negligence. Seems the Illinois statute EXPLICITLY REJECTS this defense. This is per the latest ABA Journal. -dick