last clear chance doctrine

This doctrine permits a plaintiff in a negligence action to recover, notwithstanding his own negligence, on a showing that the defendant had the last clear chance to avoid the accident. Jarrett v. Madifari, 67 A.D.2d 396, 415 N.Y.S.2d 644, 649.

Under the doctrine of last clear chance (or "discovered peril" doctrine), as applied in automobile law, a plaintiff may recover from a defendant motorist for injuries or damages suffered, notwithstanding his own contributory negligence, where, as stated in terms of the essential elements of the doctrine, plaintiff was in a place of peril of which he was unaware or from which he was unable to extricate himself, the motorist discovered or had the opportunity to discover plaintiffs peril, and the motorist had the opportunity to avoid the accident through the exercise of reasonable care. The last clear chance doctrine is not recognized in every jurisdiction and is subject to limitations in others. There are many variant forms and applications of this doctrine in the jurisdictions which apply it. Doctrine imposes upon person duty to exercise ordinary care to avoid injury to another who has negligently put himself in position of peril, and who he can reasonably apprehend is unconscious of or inattentive to peril or unable to avoid imminent harm. Vernon v. Crist, 28 N.C.App. 631, 222 S.E.2d 445, 447.

Necessary elements of doctrine are:

(1) plaintiff was contributorily negligent by placing herself in a position of immediate peril,

(2) plaintiff was unable to remove herself from such peril by the exercise of reasonable care,

(3) defendant discovered or should have discovered plaintiffs dangerous situation in time so that by exercising reasonable care defendant could have prevented the accident,

(4) defendant failed to exercise any reasonable care, and

(5) defendant had the last clear chance to prevent the accident.

Shanahan v. Patterson, Colo.App., 539 P.2d 1289, 1290.

See also discovered peril doctrine