What is Comparative Negligence? – Legal Guide to Comparative Fault

Comparative negligence is a rule used in many US states to allow plaintiffs who’re partially at-fault to receive damages for their losses. Their damages, however, are reduced based on their percentage of fault for the accident.

The courts and insurance companies have an added burden of calculating liability for each party under comparative fault. Some forms of comparative negligence even restrict victims from receiving damages if they’re 50% or more at-fault. This further increases the need for courts to accurately calculate fault.

If the court assigns 70% fault to the defendant and 30% to the plaintiff under comparative fault, the plaintiff’s damages are reduced by 30%.

Fault percentages are entirely subjective and depend on the evidence you bring to the table. You may need a personal injury attorney to accurately state the facts while legally defending you from false claims. Under comparative negligence, you may want a specialist on your side.

Comparative vs. Contributory Negligence

Negligence occurs when someone’s action or inaction causes unnecessary or deliberate harm to another person. Comparative negligence simply reduces a plaintiff’s payout by the same percentage as their amount of fault. There is another form of negligence that some states use to calculate liability.

Contributory negligence is much harsher by comparison. Under this rule, the plaintiff cannot recover any damages if they contributed in any way to the incident. So, even if they were found to only be 1% negligent, they cannot recover anything from the other party.

Four states and the District of Columbia recognize the contributory negligence rule:

1. Alabama
2. Maryland
3. North Carolina
4. Virginia

Comparative negligence is much more forgiving for the plaintiff when pursuing damages. You’ll need an expert personal injury attorney for both negligence rules to maximize your chances of earning a settlement.

Types of Comparative Negligence in Tort Law

The courts must establish four elements to prove whether another person’s actions are negligent under personal injury law, which are:

1. Duty of Care
2. Breach of Duty of Care
3. Causation
4. Significant Damages

A prima facie case of negligence occurs when a person or group fails to fulfill their duty of care to another person and it’s very clear-cut. However, some personal injury claims are less transparent and require further investigation.

There are two forms of comparative negligence states use to determine whether the plaintiff receives damages for their loss:

• Pure comparative fault
• Modified comparative fault

Some states reject damages who’re more than 50% at-fault, and there are others who offer damages regardless of fault percentage. Know your state’s negligence laws as it influences your personal injury settlement.

Pure Comparative Fault

Under pure comparative fault, the state allows a plaintiff to claim reduced damage amounts, even if they’re 99% at-fault. In that situation under pure comparative fault, they would receive only 1% of overall damages.

The plaintiff’s collectible settlement is reduced based on their assigned fault determined by the court. The only difference here is that it doesn’t matter who had the bigger percentage of fault.

Modified Comparative Fault

Modified comparative negligence completely bars plaintiffs from receiving damages if they pass a certain percentage of fault. Any fault percentage below that limit is calculated like pure comparative fault.

There are two types of modified comparative negligence, a rule that is followed by most states.

1. Under the 50-percent bar rule: the plaintiff may not recover damages if they are found to be 50% or more at-fault.
2. Under the 51-percent bar rule: the plaintiff may not recover damages if they are assigned 51% or more of the fault.

Unlike pure comparative fault or contributory negligence, modified comparative fault works as a compromise between the two laws.

Be careful with comparative negligence, as this law encourages insurance companies to hunt for small indicators of fault to lower your settlement. Properly defend yourself with a personal injury attorney so they don’t lowball your settlement amount.

Which States are Comparative Negligence States?

These states implement pure comparative negligence laws in their personal injury claims:

States	Pure Comparative Negligence Statute or Precedence
Alaska	Alaska Stat. § 09.17.060-80
Arizona	Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-2505
California	13 Cal.3d 804, 532 P.2d 1226 (1975); Li v. Yellow Cab Co.
Florida	Fla. Stat. § 768.81(2)
Kentucky	Ky. Rev. Stat. § 411.182
Louisiana	La. Civ. Code art. 2323
Mississippi	Miss. Code § 11-7-15
Missouri	Gustafson v. Benda, 661 S.W.2d 11 (1983); Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.765
New Mexico	N.M. Stat. § 41-4-1 et seq; Scott v. Rizzo, 634 P.2d 1234
New York	N.Y. CPLR 1411
Rhode Island	R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-20-4
Washington	Wash. Rev. Code § 4.22.005

Besides states that follow contributory negligence laws and South Dakota, which follows slight versus gross negligence, the rest of the U.S. outside this list follows modified comparative negligence.

Types of Comparative Negligence Claims

Comparative negligence often affects car crashes where multiple people may be responsible for an accident. For example, if a driver sustained serious injuries from someone’s actions, but they were partially at-fault as well, the court may assign a percentage of fault to both the plaintiff and the defendant driver.

This is done even when the defendant is found to be even more at-fault because, for example, they ignored a red light.

Most personal injury claims, like dog bites, however, are more complicated than this. Even seemingly clear-cut cases like pedestrian claims may involve both parties sharing some portion of the fault.

Drivers carry a heavy duty of care to protect pedestrians from harm. Even so, a pedestrian can be found at-fault if they fail to follow traffic rules, resulting in their injury.

If the driver properly fulfilled their duty of care under comparative negligence, the damages they owe to the pedestrian may be reduced by the pedestrian’s degree of fault.

How Can an Attorney Reduce Your Comparative Fault?

If you’re less than 50% negligent for an accident, you may receive a settlement offer from the other party’s insurance. Their amounts are based on what they believe to be the amount of negligence each party carries.

Insurance companies aim to give the lowest possible settlement they can get away with to protect their profit margins. Since fault percentages may be in dispute, an attorney can analyze your case and truly determine liability for each party.

An insurance company may try to emphasize certain details to inflate your liability, lowering your total settlement amount. These disputes can even bar you from receiving damages under a modified comparative negligence system.

Again, a personal injury attorney can help in this situation by investigating your claim, interviewing witnesses, and reviewing the evidence to reduce your comparative fault.

Your attorney can either negotiate with the insurance company or represent your case in court. If your claim escalates to where a judge or jury decides your case, call an expert attorney to represent you.

Consult With a Personal Injury Attorney Through LegalASAP

Without legal representation, you may run the risk of a settlement that falls short of covering your losses. Don’t let insurance companies short-change you by calling a personal injury attorney to enforce your rights.

Most personal injury attorneys in our network operate under contingency. A lawyer operating under contingency only takes a cut from your settlement when you win. There are no upfront fees during the legal process or if your claim fails to qualify.

Increase your chances for an adequate settlement with the 500+ law firms in our network around the United States. Call 888-927-3080 to speak to a legal representative, or fill out the evaluation form below.