Question

Bob, a guest at a hotel, reached into the front seat of the hotel limousine to get his briefcase. He supported himself by placing his left hand on the center pillar to which the rear door was hinged. A hotel employee closed the rear door, smashing Bob's hand. A part of Bob's left index finger later had to be amputated. Bob filed a negligence lawsuit against the hotel in a state that adopted a "pure" form of comparative negligence. In this case, the court most likely would find that: a. Bob did not contribute to his injury and award him full damages. b. Bob did not contribute to his injury and apportion his damages. c. Bob contributed to his injury and award him nothing in damages. d. Bob contributed to his injury and apportion his damages.

Answer 1

In this case, the court most likely would find that Bob contributed to his injury and apportion his damages.

Explanation:

• Though Bob chose to blame the hotel employee and adopted a "pure" form of comparative negligence while filing the lawsuit, the court was vigilant and intelligent enough to realize that the accident had taken place due to the negligence of both, the hotel employee as well as Bob.
• If Bob himself had taken care and had not placed his hand on the central pillar of the door for support, the accident wouldn't have happened.