Comparative negligence plays a primary role in personal injury cases, determining how much compensation a victim can get based on their level of fault in an accident. Some see it as a fair way to distribute responsibility, while others argue it can unfairly reduce the compensation victims deserve.
Professionals like the injury attorneys from Franklin D. Azar & Associates, P.C. often deal with cases where comparative negligence is a critical factor in the outcome, making it essential for claimants to grasp its implications fully. Franklin D. Azar & Associates, P.C. have been in the field for over 30 years. They have served over 50 thousand victims and secured around $2 billion as compensation.
In this piece, we’ll dive into comparative negligence, exploring its fairness and role as a defense in personal injury claims.
How Comparative Negligence Works
Under comparative negligence, the court allocates a percentage of fault to each party centered on their actions leading up to the accident. For example, if one driver ran a red light but the other was speeding, both may share responsibility for the crash.
If the court decides the first driver is 70% at fault and the second driver is 30% at fault, the second driver can still recover damages but at a reduced rate. In this scenario, if the total damages amount to $100,000, the second driver would only be eligible to receive $70,000—subtracting the 30% of fault assigned to them.
Types of Comparative Negligence
Two primary types of comparative negligence are used in different states: pure comparative negligence and modified comparative negligence.
- Pure Comparative Negligence: In this system, an individual can regain damages even if they are 99% at fault, though their percentage of fault will reduce their compensation. For instance, if someone is found 90% responsible for an accident, they can still recover 10% of the damages awarded.
- Modified Comparative Negligence: This system, used in most states, places a cap on recovery. Individuals who are more than 50% or 51% at fault (depending on the state) are barred from recovering any damages. This stricter model prevents those who are mostly at fault from seeking compensation.
Why Comparative Negligence is Essential in Personal Injury Cases
For accident victims, comparative negligence can have a major impact on their compensation. Even if you have a strong case, being found partially at fault will reduce your financial recovery. In some cases, the defense may use comparative negligence to redirect part of the blame to you, thus reducing their liability.
For example, in a slip-and-fall case, the property owner may argue that the injured party wasn’t paying attention or ignored warning signs, assigning part of the blame to the victim. This can lower the compensation the victim is entitled to, even though the property owner’s negligence contributed to the accident.
Is Comparative Negligence a Fair Concept?
The fairness of comparative negligence often depends on one’s perspective. On the one hand, it acknowledges that accidents can be caused by the actions of more than one party and seeks to allocate responsibility accordingly. This prevents victims from receiving full compensation if they also played a role in the accident.
On the other hand, critics argue that comparative negligence can unfairly reduce a victim’s compensation in cases where the fault is not evenly shared. Even small mistakes by the victim could significantly reduce the compensation they deserve, particularly under the modified version of this law.
Defending Against Claims of Comparative Negligence
If you’re involved in an accident and face a defense of comparative negligence, it’s essential to present strong evidence that minimizes your percentage of fault. This can include witness statements, accident reports, and expert testimony that clarifies how the accident occurred and highlights the other party’s greater responsibility.
Reducing the percentage of fault assigned to you can affect the final compensation awarded.
Comparative negligence is a complicated aspect of personal injury law, balancing shared responsibility with the need for fair compensation, knowing how it applies to your case, and taking steps to minimize your share of fault is crucial for maximizing your recovery.
Lynn Martelli is an editor at Readability. She received her MFA in Creative Writing from Antioch University and has worked as an editor for over 10 years. Lynn has edited a wide variety of books, including fiction, non-fiction, memoirs, and more. In her free time, Lynn enjoys reading, writing, and spending time with her family and friends.
