▁its ▁reasoning ▁on ▁Section ▁ 1 7 1 4 ▁of ▁the ▁Civil ▁Code , ▁which ▁had ▁been ▁thought ▁to ▁cod ify ▁the ▁" all - or - nothing " ▁approach ▁to ▁contrib ut ory ▁neg lig ence : ▁ ▁" Every one ▁is ▁responsible , ▁not ▁only ▁for ▁the ▁result ▁of ▁his ▁will ful ▁acts , ▁but ▁also ▁for ▁an ▁injury ▁occasion ed ▁to ▁another ▁by ▁his ▁want ▁of ▁ordinary ▁care ▁or ▁skill ▁in ▁the ▁management ▁of ▁his ▁property ▁or ▁person , ▁except ▁so ▁far ▁as ▁the ▁latter ▁has , ▁will fully ▁or ▁by ▁want ▁of ▁ordinary ▁care , ▁brought ▁the ▁injury ▁upon ▁himself . ▁The ▁extent ▁of ▁li ability ▁in ▁such ▁cases ▁is ▁defined ▁by ▁the ▁Title ▁on ▁Comp ens atory ▁Rel ief ." ▁ ▁The ▁plain ▁meaning ▁of ▁section ▁ 1 7 1 4 ▁was ▁quite ▁clear , ▁but ▁the ▁court ▁concluded ▁that ▁the ▁California ▁State ▁Legisl ature ▁had ▁not ▁meant ▁to ▁stop ▁the ▁evolution ▁of ▁the ▁common ▁law , ▁which ▁is ▁quite ▁normal ▁in ▁state ▁tort ▁law , ▁but ▁rather ▁only ▁to ▁clarify ▁the ▁law ▁that ▁existed ▁at ▁the ▁time . ▁ ▁External ▁links ▁▁▁ ▁Li ▁v . ▁Y ellow ▁Cab ▁Co . ▁Case ▁Br ief ▁at ▁La wn ix . com ▁ ▁Category : Cal iforn ia ▁state ▁case ▁law ▁Category : Un ited ▁States ▁tort ▁case ▁law ▁Category : 1 9 7 5 ▁in ▁United ▁States ▁case ▁law ▁Category : 1 9 7 5 ▁in ▁California <0x0A> </s> ▁A ▁traditional ▁I RA ▁is ▁an ▁individual ▁ret irement ▁arrangement