
    Barbara SMITH v. MARSHALL COUNTY, et al.
    1902006.
    Supreme Court of Alabama.
    March 12, 1993.
    Donald R. Rhea, Clarence F. Rhea of Rhea, Boyd & Rhea, and Roy 0. McCord of McCord & Martin, Gadsden, for appellant.
    Dennis Riley, Huntsville, for appellees.
    Bruce J. McKee of Hare, Wynn, Newell & Newton, Birmingham, for amicus curiae Alabama Trial Lawyers Ass’n.
   PER CURIAM.

This case involves a one-vehicle accident. The plaintiff appeals from a judgment rendered on a jury verdict in favor of the defendants. The sole issue is whether the trial court erred in refusing to give charges on comparative negligence. We affirm on the authority of Williams v. Delta Inter national Machinery Corp., 619 So.2d 1330 (Ala.1993).

AFFIRMED.

MADDOX, ALMON, ADAMS, HOUSTON and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.

HORNSBY, C.J., and SHORES and INGRAM, JJ., dissent.

HORNSBY, Chief Justice

(dissenting):

I respectfully dissent. See my special opinion in Williams v. Delta International Machinery Corp., 619 So.2d 1330 (Ala.1993).

SHORES, J., concurs.

INGRAM, Justice

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent. I would adopt the doctrine of comparative negligence, because it would provide the people of Alabama with an up-to-date judicial tool that would promote greater fairness in negligence actions.

We live in the remarkable age of technology in so many areas of our lives. Yet, by retaining the doctrine of contributory negligence, we continue to adhere to the most outmoded concept in our justice system.  