Defenses to Actions Involving Recreational Boating Accidents

When a plaintiff files a lawsuit regarding a recreational boating accident, the defendant may claim defenses that are similar to those available in any other accident case. Such defenses include that the accident was inevitable, that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent or assumed the risk, that there was a superseding cause, or that the plaintiff's action is barred by the doctrine of laches or by a statute of limitations.

Tort Action for Failure to Provide Facilities to the Public

Under the common law, a person commits a tort when he or she fails to provide a public utility or a public facility to a member of the public. In order to be liable for this tort, the person must have a non-contractual duty to provide the public utility or the public facility to the public. A denial of the public utility or the public facility constitutes a breach of that duty.

Comparative Negligence vs. Contributory Negligence

Under the legal doctrine of comparative negligence, when both the plaintiff and the defendant are guilty of negligence, the plaintiff's damage award will be reduced by the amount of his responsibility for the accident. For example, a motorcycle rider collides with a truck driver at an intersection.

Damages in Actions Involving Recreational Boating Accidents

When an action involving a recreational boating accident is brought in accordance with federal admiralty law, such federal admiralty law controls the issue of damages. Damages under federal admiralty law are similar to damages under the common law.

Unusual Defenses to Defamation

Defamation lawsuits are not easy to win because the plaintiff must both prove the difficult elements of his or her case and avoid the many defenses to defamation. This article discusses two unusual "defenses" to defamation, the insubstantial but practical defense of I-dare-you-to-sue, and the real but rare defense of consent.