If a plaintiff meets all of the requirements for a negligence claim, it does not necessarily mean that the plaintiff will automatically win their lawsuit. There are certain defenses available to the defendant, which are state-specific. Some of those defenses are: (1) contributory negligence; (2) "pure" comparative negligence; and (3) "modified" comparative negligence. If a defendant pleads one of these defenses in the answer, the fact finder (judge or jury depending on the case) at the end of the trial will first determine the amount of money that the plaintiff has been damaged. If the plaintiff did suffer damages, the fact finder then will assign percentages of negligence to both the plaintiff and defendant to determine who was the cause of that damage. If the plaintiff is assigned a percentage of negligence (meaning that the plaintiff contributed to their own damages), then based on the specific defense utilized, the plaintiff's overall damages' amount can then be reduced. For example, in states that allow for the "contributory negligence" defense, the plaintiff recovers nothing if the plaintiff is found even 1% negligent.

"Contributory negligence" can lead to some harsh results. Please make an argument as to why "contributory negligence" should still be a valid defense in a negligence action.