Comparative negligence of a child Essay

Sowhat do you hark back about this defense? Do you ideate its executable? Are on that point otherwise things to find out?            Unfortunately, it is a viable defense.  At least in that respect be legal precedents and provisions for contributory negligence.  exclusively i al instructions that defense was broadly used in assembly line to business contract disputes.  I thought it worked this way if company A hires company B to do, say, a financial audit.  If company A doesnt give B solely of its records, and then sues them for giving the wrong audit position, then company contributed to the wrongdoing by NOT giving company B the records it needed.Also, considering that this is a 7 form old, the examination becomes what 7 year old is beyond negligence.  As adults we restrain a higher(prenominal) responsibility than children.  I would say that only adults can truly be censurable of contributory negli gence.  The main thing to consider is that the driver was drunk.  What could any 7 year old (or 17 or 70 year old) do to ward slay a drunk driver.  If he woolly-headed control due to his drunkeness there was goose egg that child could have done shut out stay in the house.  And that is unreasonable.  No gore should award in their favor or against the defendant.Pre-Judgment versus Post-Judgment Interest (Response Question) Make sense?            The pursual makes sense.  What doesnt make sense is that there is no precedent or clearing on how the pastime is actually calculated.  That is where a good lawyer comes in.  He/she would have to specify how they want it done in the initial lawsuit.  I think that interest on awarded damages gives the recipient an opportunity to be compensated for the time it takes to neck the suit and transfer the money.After 4 years the interest really isnt pocket money, it is just adjusting the award for inflation.  The other thing interest does is allow you to follow more money than would normally be allowed in a particular emblem of lawsuit.  I think that courts should make logical rules for the interest rate that can be awarded on specific cases, and set rules on how it will be calculated to balk get ahead bickering between the parties, and further appeals over the interest that has to be paid.