Rolando Fernandes, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Dar Development Corp. and Dar Construction, Inc., Defendants-Appellants

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the trial court's refusal to submit a comparative negligence instruction in a negligence action by an injured construction worker against a general contractor. The Court held that employee negligence may be submitted to a jury only when evidence shows the employee unreasonably confronted a known risk and had no meaningful choice, and found no such evidence here. The decision relied on the precedents set in Kane and distinguished the Suter rule as limited to product‑liability contexts.