Senate Bill No. 460
(By Senators Anderson, Sharpe, Helmick, Love,
Dittmar, Scott, Dugan, Miller, Schoonover, Ross, Buckalew,
Kimble, Boley, Minear and Deem)
[Introduced February 20, 1995; referred to the Committee
on the Judiciary; and then to the Committee on Finance.]
A BILL to amend chapter fifty-five of the code of West Virginia,
one thousand nine hundred thirty-one, as amended, by adding
thereto a new article, designated article seven-d, relating
to comparative fault and joint and several liability
generally; definitions; establishing the comparative fault
standard; abolishing joint liability except in limited
circumstances; describing how to consider the fault of
nonparties; describing how to consider the fault and the
amounts paid by settling parties; describing the effect of
a good faith settlement by one person upon the contribution
rights of another; providing for the use of special
interrogatories; defining the concept and applicability of
the doctrine of assumption of the risk; establishing an irrebuttable presumption of knowledge regarding certain
warnings; setting forth the circumstances under which joint
liability shall be imposed; allowing the assessment of a
percentage of fault for failing to take reasonable
precautionary measures that are available; precluding
recovery by a plaintiff injured while involved in a felony
criminal act; precluding the allocation of fault to a person
such as a seller, distributor or installer on a strict
product liability theory where that person did not
contribute to the alleged defect; providing for the burden
of proof; limitations; severability; repeal of conflicting
laws; and applicability.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:
That chapter fifty-five of the code of West Virginia, one
thousand nine hundred thirty-one, as amended, be amended by
adding thereto a new article, designated article seven-d, to read
ARTICLE 7D. WEST VIRGINIA COMPARATIVE FAULT ACT.
§55-7D-1. Short title.
This article may be cited as the West Virginia comparative
The following words, as used in this article, shall have the
meanings set forth below unless the context clearly requires
(a) "Damage" or "damages" means pain, suffering,
inconvenience, physical impairment, disfigurement, mental
anguish, emotional distress, loss of society and companionship,
loss of consortium, injury to reputation, humiliation, any other
theory of damages such as fear of loss or illness or injury, loss
of earnings and earning capacity, loss of income, medical
expenses and medical care, rehabilitation services, custodial
care, burial costs, loss of use of property, costs of repair or
replacement of property, costs of obtaining substitute domestic
services, loss of employment, loss of business or employment
opportunities and other losses. It does not include punitive
(b) "Fault" means an act or omission of a person which is a
proximate cause of injury or death to another person or persons,
damage to property, tangible or intangible, or economic injury,
including but not limited to, negligence, malpractice, medical
professional liability, strict product liability, absolute liability, liability under section two, article four, chapter
twenty-three of this code, or assumption of the risk as described
in section six of this article.
(c) "Comparative fault" means the degree to which the fault
of each person was a proximate cause of the alleged injury or
death or damage to property, tangible or intangible, expressed as
(d) "Person" means any individual, corporation, company,
association, firm, partnership, society, joint stock company or
any other entity, including any governmental entity or
unincorporated association of persons.
(e) "Plaintiff" means, for purposes of determining a right
to recover under this article, any person asserting a claim.
(f) "Defendant" means, for purposes of determining an
obligation to pay damages to another under this article, any
person against whom a claim is asserted by a plaintiff.
§55-7D-3. Comparative fault standard established.
In any action for personal injury, property damage or
wrongful death, recovery shall be predicated upon principles of
comparative fault and the liability of each person who caused the
injury shall be allocated to each person in direct proportion to that person's percentage of fault. Where the percentage of fault
chargeable to the plaintiff is less than the aggregate fault of
all defendants and nonparties, the plaintiff may recover damages,
but the plaintiff's recovery of damages shall be diminished in
proportion to the percentage of fault chargeable to the
Where the plaintiff's percentage of fault is equal to or
exceeds the aggregate fault of all defendants and nonparties, the
plaintiff shall be barred from any recovery.
The total of the percentages of comparative fault allocated
by the trier of fact with respect to a particular incident or
injury must equal either zero percent or one hundred percent.
§55-7D-4. Several liability.
Except as provided in section seven of this article, or in
instances where joint liability is specifically imposed by
statute, in any action for personal injury, property damage or
wrongful death, the liability of each defendant for damages shall
be several only and shall not be joint. Each defendant shall be
liable only for the amount of damages allocated to that defendant
in direct proportion to that defendant's percentage of fault and
a separate judgment shall be rendered against the defendant for that amount. To determine the amount of judgment to be entered
against each defendant, the court, with regard to each defendant,
shall multiply the total amount of damages recoverable by the
plaintiff by the percentage of each defendant's fault and that
amount shall be the maximum recoverable against said defendant.
§55-7D-5. Fault of nonparties.
(a) In assessing percentages of fault the trier of fact
shall consider the fault of all persons who contributed to the
alleged injury or death or damage to property, tangible or
intangible, regardless of whether said person was, or could have
been named as a party to the suit. Such fault shall include the
fault imputed or attributed to a person by operation of law, if
any. Negligence or fault of a nonparty may be considered if the
plaintiff entered into a settlement agreement with the nonparty
or if the defending party gives notice no later than one hundred
twenty days before the date of trial that a nonparty was wholly
or partially at fault. The notice shall be given by filing a
pleading in the action designating such nonparty and setting
forth such nonparty's name and last-known address, or the best
identification of such nonparty which is possible under the
circumstances, together with a brief statement of the basis for believing such nonparty to be at fault. In all instances where
a nonparty is assessed a percentage of fault, any recovery by a
plaintiff shall be reduced in proportion to the percentage of
fault chargeable to such nonparty. Where a plaintiff has settled
with a party or nonparty before verdict, that plaintiff's
recovery will be reduced by the amount of such settlement or in
proportion to the percentage of fault assigned to the settling
party or nonparty, whichever is greater.
(b) A good faith settlement by any person with a plaintiff
extinguishes all rights of other persons to seek or obtain
contribution from the settling person. Plaintiff shall fully
inform all other persons against whom liability is asserted of
the terms of any such settlement, which shall then be considered
in any verdict pursuant to section five-a of this article.
(c) Nothing in this article is meant to eliminate or
diminish any defenses or immunities which currently exist, except
as expressly noted herein. Assessments of percentages of fault
for nonparties are used only as a vehicle for accurately
determining the fault of named parties. Where fault is assessed
against nonparties, findings of such fault shall not subject any
nonparty to liability in this or any other action, or be introduced as evidence of liability in any action.
(d) In all actions involving fault of more than one person,
the court, unless otherwise agreed by all parties to the action,
shall instruct the jury to answer special interrogatories or, if
there is no jury, shall make findings, indicating:
(1) The amount of damages that each person making a claim
would be entitled to recover if comparative fault is disregarded;
(2) The percentage of the total fault that is allocated to
each person pursuant to the provisions of this article. For this
purpose the court may determine that two or more persons are to
be treated as a single person.
§55-7D-6. Assumption of the risk.
(a) Assumption of the risk shall operate as a complete bar
to an action when the injured person:
(1) Expressly, in writing or orally, assumed the risk of
(2) Had knowledge of the risk, as proven by actions,
statements or direct testimony, yet undertook or continued the
activity that constituted exposure to the risk.
(b) In situations not covered by section six-a, but where reasonably prudent persons would have realized the risk before
exposing themselves to it, assumption of the risk shall be
considered as a factor in apportioning fault.
(c) In all cases involving products, structures or services
where a warning has been provided concerning the product,
structure or service, including any warning required or approved
by a federal or state government body or regulatory agency, proof
of the existence of the warning will create an irrebuttable
presumption that the plaintiff knew of the warning's content.
§55-7D-7. Concert of action.
(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section four of this
article, joint liability shall be imposed on all who consciously
and deliberately pursue a common plan or design to commit a
tortious act and actively take part in it. Except as provided in
section five-b of this article, any person held jointly liable
under this section shall have a right of contribution from those
with whom he was acting in concert. A person shall be held
jointly responsible only for the total portion of comparative
fault assessed to those with whom he acted in concert under this
(b) A person shall also be responsible for the portion of comparative fault assessed against another person who was acting
as an agent or servant of such person, or if the fault of the
other person is otherwise imputed or attributed to such person by
statute or common law.
§55-7D-8. Failure to take reasonable precautionary measures.
In any civil action, the finder of fact may assess a
percentage of fault against a plaintiff who is injured as a
proximate result of that plaintiff's failure to take reasonable
precautionary measures that are available, such as wearing a
seatbelt, even if such failure is not a proximate cause of the
§55-7D-9. Plaintiff involved in felony criminal act.
In any civil action, a defendant is not liable for damages
that the plaintiff incurs if the plaintiff is harmed as a result
of the negligence or gross negligence of a defendant while the
plaintiff is attempting to commit, committing or fleeing from his
or her commission of a felony criminal act.
§55-7D-10. Fault of person not a manufacturer.
A person who is not the manufacturer of a product but is
merely in the chain of its distribution, such as a seller,
distributor or installer, and who did not alter, change or modify the product in a way that created or contributed to the alleged
defect, may not be assessed a percentage of comparative fault
under the theory of strict product liability for accidents,
injuries or damages proximately caused, in whole or in part, by
§55-7D-11. Burden of proof.
The burden of alleging and proving comparative fault shall
be upon the person who seeks to establish such fault.
Nothing in this article shall be construed to create a cause
of action. Nothing in this article shall be construed, in any
way, to alter the immunity of any person as established by
statute or common law.
If any provision of this article or the application thereof
to any person or circumstance is held unconstitutional or
invalid, such unconstitutionality or invalidity shall not affect
other provisions or applications of the article, and to this end
the provisions of this article are declared to be severable.
§55-7D-14. Conflicting laws repealed.
This article supersedes, invalidates and repeals all other
state laws which conflict with its provisions.
This article applies to all tort actions commenced on or
after the effective date of this article.
NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to establish and
operationalize a comparative fault standard.
This article is new; therefore, strike-throughs and
underscoring have been omitted.