Personal Injury Blog

What Is Comparative NegligenceComparative negligence is part of a legal defense that reduces the amount of damages that a plaintiff can recover in a negligence-based claim. It is determined by how much the plaintiff's own negligence contributed to cause the injury. This conclusion is arrived throughout the course of the claim in court or through mediation.  When the defense is asserted, the fact-finder, usually a jury, must decide the degree to which the plaintiff's negligence versus the combined negligence of all other relevant factors contributed to cause the plaintiff's damages.

Why Is Comparative Negligence Important To Your Claim?

Comparative negligence is an important part of any claim where financial rewards are being considered. It accounts for the portion of the defense that claims that the defendant (or party of) is only liable for damages up to a certain point. Therefore it directly influences the amount of damages a plaintiff is awarded at the conclusion of a trial or an out of court settlement. Remember, not every case gets to court. Many times both parties are able to reach a compromise with which they both feel comfortable. And as always, we reiterate that every case is unique.

Further Clarification Of Comparative Negligence

Prior to the late 1960s only a few states had adopted this system. When comparative negligence was adopted, essentially three versions were used, depending on the state.

  1. “Pure” comparative negligence. A plaintiff who was 90% to blame for an accident could recover 10% of his losses. (Of course, if the defendant suffered injuries in such a case, he or she could counter claim and recover 90% of his/her losses from the other party.
  2. The second and third versions are lumped together in what is called "modified" comparative negligence. One variant allows plaintiffs to recover only if the plaintiff's negligence is "not greater than" the defendant's (viz., the plaintiff's negligence must not be more than 50% of the combined negligence of both parties). The other type of comparative negligence permits plaintiffs to recover only if the plaintiff's negligence is "not as great as" the defendant's (viz., the plaintiff's negligence must be less than 50% of the combined negligence). The apparently minor difference between the two modified forms of comparative negligence are thought by lawyers handling such cases to be significant in that juries who ordinarily assign degrees of fault are much less willing to award damages to a plaintiff who is equally at fault than to one who is less at fault than the defendant.

Do You Have A Question About Comparative Negligence?

The law is a very nuanced entity and varies from state to state. The above information is meant as a general primer and not a definitive summation of comparative negligence. Every case is different and comparative negligence will be defined in context of each case’s circumstances. Therefore, we recommend you contact us here at Lowman Law Firm. Our consultations are free. If you’ve been injured in some kind of accident and you feel you are not at fault, then you may qualify for damages that can cover medical expenses, lost wages and possibly even your suffering.

 

Free Consultation

Leave A Comment