A defendant is not confined to denials of the allegations of the complaint or petition, but is entitled to set out new matter in defense or as a basis for affirmative relief. In a suit in which plaintiff alleges that defendant has been negligent, contributory negligence by the plaintiff is sometimes a defense which a defendant can raise.
This form is a generic example of an answer and affirmative defense that may be referred to when preparing such a pleading for your particular state.
A Missouri Answer by Defendant in a Civil Lawsuit Alleging the Affirmative Defense of Contributory Negligence provides a detailed response and defense strategy in a civil lawsuit where the defendant asserts contributory negligence as a defense. Missouri recognizes contributory negligence as a legal doctrine that can impact the liability of parties involved in an accident or incident. This type of answer aims to refute or mitigate the plaintiff's claims by alleging that their own negligence contributed to the damages suffered. Keywords: Missouri, Answer by Defendant, Civil Lawsuit, Affirmative Defense, Contributory Negligence, Liability, Defense Strategy, Response, Plaintiff, Damages. Different types of Missouri Answers by Defendant in a Civil Lawsuit Alleging the Affirmative Defense of Contributory Negligence may include: 1. General Denial Answer: In this type of answer, the defendant generally denies all the allegations made by the plaintiff, including the occurrence of negligence and contributory negligence. The defendant may argue that they were not negligent or that their negligence did not contribute to the incident. 2. Comparative Negligence Answer: This answer asserts that both the plaintiff and the defendant were negligent and apportions the percentage of fault between the parties. Based on Missouri's comparative fault system, the defendant may argue that the plaintiff's negligence contributed more to the incident than their own, reducing or even eliminating their liability. 3. Assumption of Risk Answer: This defense asserts that the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily assumed the risks associated with the situation or activity, potentially releasing the defendant from liability. The defendant may argue that the plaintiff was fully aware of the potential dangers and voluntarily chose to participate, absolving them from responsibility. 4. Last Clear Chance Answer: This defense applies in situations where the defendant acknowledges their own negligence but argues that the plaintiff had the last clear chance to avoid the incident. The defendant may claim that the plaintiff had an opportunity to prevent the harm from occurring but failed to do so, thus shifting liability. 5. Sovereign Immunity Answer: In certain cases, where the defendant is a governmental entity or individual acting within their official capacity, a defense of sovereign immunity may be raised. This argument asserts that the defendant is immune from liability due to their status as a government entity or official. Overall, a Missouri Answer by Defendant in a Civil Lawsuit Alleging the Affirmative Defense of Contributory Negligence serves to protect the defendant's interests and establish their defense against the plaintiff's claims, leveraging Missouri's specific legal doctrines related to the allocation of fault and liability in civil cases.
