A pedestrian domiciled in State A was crossing a street in State B when he was hit by a car driven by a citizen of a foreign country. Both the pedestrian and the driver suffered injuries. The pedestrian filed a negligence action against the driver in a federal district court in State B, seeking $100,000 in damages. The driver believes that the pedestrian was crossing the street illegally and is therefore responsible for the accident. The driver seeks an attorney's advice on how best to respond to the action. Assume that State B is a contributory negligence state. How should the attorney advised?

Explanation:

The meaning if contributory negligence is a type of law whereby if a plaintiff ( the accuser) has been found to have 10%, fault at cause will gave nothing to recover even if the defendant has 90% at fault.

From the above question, the street crosser as just a little fault to the accident which is crossing the street that is very dangerous without considering the options, whether a car is approaching or not and the defendant has about 95% fault because if he was driving at a controlled speed, there is every chance that he would have controlled the situation. But been the fact that state B is a contributory negligence state, based on my explanation of negligence state, it is possible for the defendant to win the case. As a lawyer I will advise the driver to go on with his defense that the plantif is more at fault.

This is known as the encoding specificity effect. In short, the theory is that memory and certain recalls of information is stronger for an individual if the conditions when the information is created in the brain are the same conditions that exist when the information is retrieved by the brain.