Originally Posted by
wphamilton
All I can say is that I have seen claims of comparative negligence with respect to the helmet, and not about those other things. Making up unreasonable examples of what "might" be claimed is inconsequential to the fact that not wearing a helmet sometimes "is" claimed as comparative negligence.
Again,
ANYTHING could be referenced in respect to claims of comparative negligence. IMO it is unreasonable to assume that any such claims are ever successful or consequential in the absence of a legal requirement for its use or wear.