Sentence examples for more negligent from inspiring English sources

See, e.g., Van Horn v. Blanchard Co., 88 N.J. 91, 438 A.2d 552 (1981) (holding that under Comparative Negligence Act, a plaintiff could recover only from those defendants that were more negligent than was the plaintiff); N.J.S.A. 2A:15-5.1 15-5.1 15-5.1 L. 1982, c. 191 [476 as2d 1228] § 1 eff.

The basis of joint and several liability prior to Li was that between an innocent plaintiff and two or more negligent defendants, it was proper to hold the defendants jointly and severally liable.

In the instant case we have concluded that the force of Li's rationale applies equally to the allocation of responsibility between two or more negligent defendants and requires a modification of this state's traditional all-or nothing common law equitable indemnity doctrine.

; But how much more negligent medicine would that encourage?

However, it may have actually revealed that younger users are more negligent, or at least less concerned, with their privacy controls.

Said Roper, who worked at Caring.com when the survey was done: "Boomers are notorious for putting things off like saving for retirement, so I guess I wasn't surprised the percentage was so low". Gen X'ers, some of whom are in their early 50s, are even more negligent: 64% them don't have wills, Caring.com said.

Tort law's main contribution is accordingly found in the numerically more significant negligent interferences with life and physical integrity, to which the rest of this article is limited.

A military courts martial concluded in January 2006 that while he was guilty of making false statements and obstructing justice, he was not guilty of the more serious negligent homicide charge.

From this the Commission concludes that since § 10(b) is not by its terms explicitly restricted to willful, knowing, or purposeful conduct, it should not be construed in all cases to require more than negligent action or inaction as a precondition for civil liability.

Recognizing that § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 might be held to require proof of more than negligent nonfeasance by Ernst & Ernst as a precondition to the imposition of civil liability, respondents further contend that the case should be remanded for trial under whatever standard is adopted.

(c) The structure of the 1934 Act and the interrelated Securities Act of 1933 19333 Act) does not support the contention that since § 10(b), in contrast to certain other sections of these Acts, is not by its terms explicitly restricted to willful, knowing, or purposeful conduct, it should not be construed to require more than negligent action or inaction as a precondition for civil liability.