What Is Comparative Negligence in a Personal Injury Claim?

Comparative negligence is a legal principle used in personal injury claims to determine how damages should be allocated when more than one party is at fault for the injury. In these cases, both the plaintiff (the person making the claim) and the defendant (the person being sued) may share responsibility for the incident that caused the injury. Comparative negligence helps assess how much each party is to blame and then reduces the compensation accordingly.

Key Aspects of Comparative Negligence:

1. Determining Fault:
• Comparative negligence involves assigning a percentage of fault to each party involved in the accident or incident. For example, if both the plaintiff and the defendant contributed to the cause of the injury, the court will allocate fault in percentage terms. If the plaintiff is found to be partially at fault, their compensation will be reduced by their percentage of fault.
2. How it Works:
• Suppose you are injured in a car accident, and the jury determines that you were 20% responsible for the accident (perhaps you were going 5 miles per hour over the speed limit), while the defendant is 80% at fault. In a comparative negligence system, you would still be entitled to compensation for your injuries, but the amount you receive would be reduced by 20% to account for your share of the fault.
3. Types of Comparative Negligence: There are two primary types of comparative negligence rules:
• Pure Comparative Negligence:
• Under pure comparative negligence, you can recover damages even if you are found to be more than 50% at fault for the accident. Your damages will simply be reduced by your percentage of fault. For example, if you're 70% at fault for a car crash and the total damages are $100,000, you can still recover $30,000 (100,000 - 70%). Unfortunately, Massachusetts is not a pure comparative negligence state.
• Modified Comparative Negligence:
• In modified comparative negligence, you can only recover damages if your level of fault is less than 50%. If you are found to be 50% or more at fault, you are barred from recovering any damages. For example, if you are 55% at fault for an accident, you would receive no compensation, even if the defendant is 45% at fault.
4. Examples of Comparative Negligence:
• Car Accident: Suppose you're in a car accident where the other driver runs a red light but you were speeding, and both actions contributed to the collision. A court may determine that you are 30% responsible for the accident, while the other driver is 70% responsible. If you are awarded $100,000 in damages, your compensation will be reduced by your 30% share of the fault, leaving you with $70,000.
• Slip and Fall Accident: If you slip on a wet floor in a store and suffer injuries, but it turns out you were not paying attention (e.g., you were texting while walking), the store may be 60% at fault for not properly cleaning the floor, while you might be 40% at fault for your lack of attention. Your compensation will be reduced based on your 40% share of the fault.
5. Impact on Personal Injury Claims:
• Reduced Compensation: Comparative negligence reduces the amount of compensation you can receive based on how much of the accident was your fault. However, it still allows you to recover damages even if you were partially responsible, unlike contributory negligence systems (in some states) that bar recovery if you're at fault to any degree.
• Insurance Settlements: Comparative negligence also impacts how insurance companies assess claims. They will often use this principle to determine how much they should pay out based on the degree of fault of the insured party and the injured party.
6. State Variations:
• The rules governing comparative negligence vary by state. Some states follow pure comparative negligence, while others use modified comparative negligence (usually with a 50% or 51% threshold). A few states still use contributory negligence, which completely bars recovery if the injured party is at all at fault.

Key Considerations:

• Evidence and Documentation: To prove your case and minimize your own share of fault, it's crucial to have strong evidence, including witness testimonies, police reports, medical records, and expert analysis.
• Legal Help: Because comparative negligence can complicate the calculation of damages, having an experienced Lowell, Massachusetts personal injury lawyer is important. Your personal injury attorney can help ensure that you’re not unfairly assigned a higher percentage of fault and that your damages are accurately calculated.

Conclusion:

Comparative negligence allows a more nuanced approach to assigning fault and determining damages in personal injury cases. It ensures that injured parties can still receive compensation even if they are partially responsible for the accident, although their recovery is reduced based on the degree of fault they bear. Understanding your state's specific rules on comparative negligence is crucial when pursuing a personal injury claim.

At Marcotte Law Firm, our Lowell Personal Injury Lawyers have decades of experience dealing with comparative negligence and how it applies to personal injury cases. If you’re worried about how an insurance company or a jury will determine who is at fault for an accident, call our experienced Massachusetts Personal Injury Attorneys today.