What defense is being used if an adjuster determines that an injured party is partially responsible for their own injuries?

The correct answer is comparative negligence, which is a legal doctrine that allows for the apportionment of fault between parties involved in an accident. In cases where an injured party is found to be partially responsible for their own injuries, comparative negligence enables the adjuster to adjust the compensation awarded based on the percentage of fault attributed to the injured party. For example, if an individual is injured in an accident and it is determined that they were 20% responsible due to their actions, their compensation can be reduced by that percentage.

This approach is commonly utilized in personal injury cases where the actions of both the plaintiff (the injured party) and the defendant (the party accused of causing the injury) contributed to the occurrence and severity of the injury. By adopting this method, the legal system promotes fairness, ensuring that no party is solely blamed for the incident when multiple factors are at play.

In contrast, contributory negligence involves a stricter standard where any degree of fault on the part of the injured party could bar recovery altogether. Assumption of risk refers to situations where the injured party knowingly engages in activities that involve inherent risks, potentially limiting their ability to claim damages. The statute of limitations deals with the time frame within which a legal claim must be made, and