Alabama Property and Casualty Practice Exam

Prior to workers' compensation laws, which defense was NOT regularly used by employers against negligence suits?

1. Assumption of risk

2. Contributory negligence

3. Intervening cause

4. Fellow servant rule

The correct answer is: Intervening cause

The correct choice is that the "intervening cause" defense was not regularly used by employers against negligence suits prior to the establishment of workers' compensation laws. The other defenses mentioned were commonly employed by employers. The "assumption of risk" defense involved the argument that employees accepted the risks associated with their work when they agreed to take the job, thus absolving the employer of liability. "Contributory negligence" referred to the notion that if an employee was found to be at fault even slightly, they would be barred from recovering damages from the employer. The "fellow servant rule" asserted that an employer could not be held liable for injuries caused to an employee by the negligence of another employee, thus providing a shield for employers against claims. In contrast, the "intervening cause" typically relates to an unforeseen event that interrupts the causation chain, which was less frequently raised in defense during the period prior to workers' compensation laws. This suggests that while employers defensively positioned themselves against suits with more conventional arguments, the concept of an intervening cause was not a regular pillar of defense in these legal contexts at that time.