What is the test for establishing contributory negligence?

Cases relied upon by defendant are distinguishable. In Fields v. Napa Milling Co. (1958) 164 Cal.App.2d 442, 330 P.2d 459, two plaintiffs failed to establish defendant's liability. One plaintiff was found to be contributorily negligent at a time when contributory negligence was a complete defense. The other plaintiff did not sustain a compensable injury. Unlike plaintiff in this case, the plaintiffs in Fields did not prevail on the issue of liability. Defendant relies on Fields for the proposition that damages are essential to a cause of action for negligence and if a plaintiff receives no net damages, he has no cause of action. The actual language of the opinion is that "a negligent act is not actionable unless it results in injury to another...." (164 Cal.App.2d at p. 447, 330 P.2d 459; italics added.) In the case at bar, plaintiff sustained compensable injuries.