The Puzzling Doctrine of Contributory Negligence

Peter, a pedestrian, negligently crosses a street without carefully checking the vehicular traffic. Doris, a motorist, negligently speeds and strikes Peter, causing him injuries. In Anglo-American jurisdictions, Peter's recovery against Doris will likely be reduced, if not eliminated, under the doctrine of contributory (or comparative) negligence. And it might seem obvious that a plaintiff who is "at fault" should not fully recover against a tortious defendant.

But the grounds for that conclusion are not at all obvious, once one considers the following problems.