Which of the following is a recognized defense in negligence claims?

Comparative negligence is a recognized defense in negligence claims because it allows for a reduction of the plaintiff’s damages based on the proportion of fault attributed to them. Under the doctrine of comparative negligence, if a plaintiff is found to be partially at fault for their injury, their recovery may be reduced by the percentage of their responsibility in causing the accident. This approach seeks to allocate liability fairly and encourages personal responsibility by acknowledging that plaintiffs may share some degree of fault.

In contrast, the other options do not represent established defenses within negligence law. Assumption of payment is not a recognized legal doctrine in this context, and the terminology of contributory diligence does not exist in tort law; the correct term is contributory negligence, which is actually a distinct doctrine that can bar recovery altogether rather than reduce damages. Preemptive liability is also not a recognized concept in negligence claims. Understanding comparative negligence highlights the importance of evaluating the actions of all parties involved in an incident to determine appropriate liability.