Neither comparative negligence nor contributory negligence should be confused with joint and several liability , which generally holds each of two or more culpable defendants responsible for all the damages sustained by a plaintiff. For practical reasons, a plaintiff who faces the defense of comparative negligence may wish to join all potentially culpable defendants in his action since the plaintiff's negligence will be balanced against the combined negligence of all defendants in apportioning damages even if the plaintiff may not be able actually to get compensation from some of them: for example, if an insolvent individual and a major corporation were both negligent in causing plaintiff's harm.
4. If you read my blog carefully, you’ll notice that I used the term ‘comparative assessment’ when talking about ranking effort and only used the term ‘comparative judgement’ at the end of that paragraph. I have come across schools that rank effort, and this is all part of the idea that ranking is useful, which I would dispute. I don’t think that CJ ranks effort, although I do think it has the potential to because of how we tend to react to children’s writing.