70. After Cindy crashes into Nancy's mailbox while driving drunk, she gets out of her car, trips over Nancy's sidewalk, falls and breaks her arm. She then sues Nancy for the medical bills related to her broken arm. They are in a state that follows the doctrine of comparative negligence. What is the likely outcome of Cindy's lawsuit against Nancy?
Answer: D
The amount awarded to Cindy will be reduced by the percentage of her own negligence.
In a state that follows the doctrine of comparative negligence, any damages awarded to a plaintiff can be reduced based on their own level of fault in causing the injury. Since Cindy was driving drunk and crashed into Nancy's mailbox, her negligence will be taken into account, likely resulting in a reduction of her recovery based on her degree of fault.
A) Cindy will not receive anything because she was partially responsible for her injury.
This option is incorrect because, under comparative negligence, a plaintiff can still recover damages even if they are partially at fault. While Cindy's recovery may be reduced, it is not automatically eliminated due to her partial responsibility.
B) The case will be dismissed because Cindy was intoxicated.
This option is also incorrect. While Cindy’s intoxication may be relevant to her negligence, it does not automatically result in the dismissal of her case. Comparative negligence allows for the possibility of recovering damages despite her intoxicated state.
C) Nancy's liability insurance will cover all of Cindy's medical bills.
This statement is incorrect as well. Given the comparative negligence doctrine, Nancy's liability insurance would not cover all of Cindy's medical bills, especially considering that Cindy's own negligence in the incident would reduce her potential recovery.
D) The amount awarded to Cindy will be reduced by the percentage of her own negligence.
This is the correct answer. In a comparative negligence system, Cindy's award will be diminished in proportion to her share of the fault for her injuries, which directly reflects the legal principle at play in this situation.
Conclusion
Cindy's lawsuit against Nancy will likely result in a reduction of her recovery based on her own negligence due to the comparative negligence doctrine. All other options fail to accurately reflect the legal principles governing negligence and liability, as they either misinterpret the implications of Cindy's actions or incorrectly suggest that she would receive full compensation despite her responsibility in the incident.