## Facts

- Lloyd K. Van Horn, an employee of a subcontractor, worked at a construction site where William Blanchard Company was the general contractor and Epic Construction Company was a subcontractor.
- Van Horn was injured when he slipped and fell while running into a building to avoid a rain storm; he alleged the entrance was not maintained in a safe condition.
- The case was tried to a jury using special interrogatories on comparative negligence.
- The jury allocated fault: Van Horn 50%, Blanchard 30%, Epic 20%, and Epic’s employee Charles C. Hull 0%.
- The trial court entered judgment for defendants because Van Horn’s fault exceeded each defendant’s fault individually; the Appellate Division affirmed with a dissent.

## Issues

1. In a multi-defendant negligence action under New Jersey’s Comparative Negligence Act, must the plaintiff’s negligence be compared to each defendant’s negligence individually, or to the combined negligence of all defendants to determine whether recovery is barred?

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the judgment for defendants.
- The Court held that the Act requires comparing the plaintiff’s negligence to each defendant’s negligence separately, not to the aggregate negligence of multiple defendants.
- Because Van Horn (50%) was more negligent than Blanchard (30%) and more negligent than Epic (20%), he was barred from recovery against each of them.

## Legal Principles

- Under N.J.S.A. 2A:15-5.1 to -5.3, the threshold comparison is between the plaintiff and “the person against whom recovery is sought,” requiring a defendant-by-defendant assessment.
- A plaintiff is barred from recovering against a particular defendant if the plaintiff’s percentage of negligence is greater than that defendant’s percentage, even if the plaintiff’s negligence is not greater than all defendants’ negligence combined.
- When a legislature adopts statutory language from another jurisdiction, it is presumed to adopt that jurisdiction’s settled judicial construction of the language absent contrary indications.

## Conclusion

New Jersey’s Comparative Negligence Act bars recovery in multi-defendant cases when the plaintiff’s fault exceeds each individual defendant’s share, and it does not permit aggregating defendants’ negligence to satisfy the statutory threshold for recovery.


Van Horn v. William Blanchard Co., 438 A.2d 552 (N.J. 1981)