Alvis v. Ribar
Illinois Supreme Court
421 N.E.2d 886 (1981)
- Written by Ross Sewell, JD
Facts
James Alvis (plaintiff) was injured while riding in the vehicle of James Ribar (defendant). The vehicle collided with a metal barrel anchoring a temporary stop sign in place while Milburn Brothers, Inc. (defendant) performed construction under the supervision of Cook County (defendant). Alvis asked the Illinois Supreme Court to replace the doctrine of contributory negligence with that of comparative negligence. Ribar argued that a jury cannot scientifically apportion relative fault; comparative negligence rewards carelessness; and comparative negligence overcrowds court dockets. Ribar also argued that the legislature must decide whether to adopt the doctrine of comparative negligence, but that if the court does, it should select the modified form rather than the pure form. The Illinois Defense Counsel submitted an amicus curiae brief arguing that juries often ignore the contributory-negligence rule, instead using common sense to adjust damages according to the parties’ relative fault.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Moran, J.)
Dissent
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
