Comparative negligence is a legal concept used when more than one person may have contributed to an accident or injury. If an injured person is found partly responsible, the amount they may recover can be reduced—and, in some cases, recovery can be barred entirely.
The difference between pure and modified comparative negligence is the amount of fault an injured person can have before the law prevents recovery. The answer depends on the state and the type of claim involved.
For most Florida negligence actions filed after March 24, 2023, Florida uses a modified comparative-fault rule. Under Florida Statutes section 768.81, a party found to be greater than 50% at fault for their own harm generally may not recover damages. A party found to be 50% or less at fault may generally recover, but the damages are reduced by that party’s percentage of fault. There are important exceptions and claim-specific issues, so an attorney should review the facts of any particular case.
Overview of Negligence in Accident or Injury Claims
Negligence generally means failing to use the level of care that a reasonably careful person would use in similar circumstances. A negligence claim commonly involves questions such as:
– Did the defendant owe the injured person a legal duty?
– Did the defendant fail to act reasonably under the circumstances?
– Did that conduct cause the accident or injury?
– Did the injured person suffer legally recoverable damages?
Comparative negligence addresses the injured person’s conduct when the evidence suggests that more than one person contributed to the harm. It does not automatically mean that an injured person caused the accident or loses the right to pursue a claim.
Comparative Negligence
Under a pure comparative-negligence system, an injured person may recover damages even if they were more responsible for the injury than the other party. The recovery is reduced according to the injured person’s percentage of fault.
For example, suppose a jury finds that:
– Total damages are $100,000; and
– The injured person is 70% at fault.
Under a pure comparative-negligence rule, the injured person could potentially recover the 30% attributable to the other party, or $30,000. The exact result depends on the facts, evidence, applicable law, and types of damages involved.
Pure comparative negligence is not the same as Florida’s current general rule for negligence actions filed after March 24, 2023. Florida’s current statute includes a threshold that can bar recovery when the injured person’s fault is greater than 50%.
What is modified comparative negligence?
Modified comparative negligence also reduces damages according to an injured person’s percentage of fault, but it adds a threshold. If the injured person’s fault is above the applicable threshold, the injured person may not recover damages from the other party.
States use different thresholds. Some statutes use a 50% threshold, while others use a 51% threshold. The wording matters because a party found exactly 50% at fault may be treated differently from a party found 51% at fault.
Does Florida use pure or modified comparative negligence?
For most Florida negligence actions filed after March 24, 2023, Florida uses modified comparative fault. Section 768.81(6), Florida Statutes, provides that a party found to be greater than 50% at fault for their own harm may not recover damages in an action covered by the statute.
When the injured person is found to be 50% or less at fault, the damages are generally reduced in proportion to that person’s assigned fault. For example, if the total damages are $100,000 and the injured person is found 40% at fault, the damages may be reduced to $60,000 before other legal and factual issues are considered.
The 2023 change also includes applicability rules. Section 768.81 should not be applied mechanically to every case without reviewing when the cause of action was filed, the type of claim, and any applicable exception. Medical-negligence claims and other specialized claims can involve different rules.
You can review the current statute here: [Florida Statutes section 768.81]
Florida comparative-negligence examples
Example: 20% Fault
Assume an injured person has $50,000 in damages and is found 20% responsible for the harm. If Florida’s modified comparative-fault rule applies, the damages may be reduced by 20%, leaving a potential recovery of $40,000 before other issues are considered.
Example: 50% Fault
Assume an injured person has $100,000 in damages and is found exactly 50% responsible. Because the statutory threshold is greater than 50%, the person may still be eligible to recover the portion attributable to the other party, subject to the facts and applicable law. A 50% assignment would generally reduce a $100,000 award to $50,000.
Example: 51% Fault
Assume an injured person has $100,000 in damages and is found 51% responsible. For a claim covered by section 768.81, the greater-than-50% rule may bar recovery. The outcome can depend on the type of case, filing date, evidence, and any statutory exception.
These examples are simplified. Fault is not determined by an online calculator, and an insurance company’s percentage assignment is not the same as a court’s final determination.
How is fault determined in a Florida injury claim?
Fault is evaluated from the available evidence. Depending on the case, that evidence may include:
– Police or incident reports;
– Photographs and video from the scene;
– Vehicle damage and accident-reconstruction evidence;
– Statements from the parties and witnesses;
– Medical records and testimony;
– Cellphone, vehicle, or surveillance data;
– Employment and wage records; and
– Evidence about traffic rules, property conditions, warnings, or other safety requirements.
The other side may argue that an injured person was speeding, failed to follow a safety rule, ignored a warning, or otherwise contributed to the harm. Those allegations must be evaluated against the complete evidence. An injured person should be careful about giving recorded statements, signing releases, or making broad admissions before understanding how those statements may affect a claim.
What is the difference between comparative negligence and contributory negligence?
Pure contributory negligence can bar an injured person from recovering if the person is found even slightly responsible for the injury. Comparative negligence generally reduces recovery according to the injured person’s percentage of fault, although modified comparative-fault systems can bar recovery above a threshold.
For a focused explanation of these terms, read Contributory Negligence vs. Comparative Negligence: The Difference
When should you contact a Florida personal injury lawyer?
If you were injured in a car accident, motorcycle accident, slip and fall, pedestrian accident, or another incident, the other side may argue that you were partly responsible. Do not assume that an allegation of comparative negligence means you have no claim.
Lowman Law Firm can review the facts, explain the rules that may apply, and help you understand the evidence needed to evaluate your options. Contact Lowman Law Firm to request a consultation.
This article is for general information only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Florida law can change, and the result of an individual claim depends on its facts, filing date, claim type, evidence, and applicable legal rules.
