The Basics of Comparative Negligence
View PDF | Print View
by: Guest
Total views: 49
Word Count: 720
Being a personal injury attorney in Seattle, Washington and focusing on severe Bellevue auto accident cases I know how complicated Seattle auto accident settlements can be and how different the laws can be between states. While one driver may be at fault in an accident it is difficult to determine how much of the damage they are responsible for. Sometimes, the victim of the accident plays a significant role in their injuries because they were distracted, negligent or had unsafe behavior such as not wearing a seatbelt.
When both parties are found to be partially responsible for an accident or the injuries sustained it becomes a case of comparative negligence.
What is Comparative Negligence?
Comparative Negligence: a system which restricts the compensation the victim of an accident can receive if they had a role in their own injuries or damages.
An example of a comparative negligence case is if you are driving a vehicle through a green light and are struck by a car that ran a red light. The incident was not your fault, but you sustain serious injuries because you were not wearing a seatbelt. Because you contributed to your injuries when you failed to wear a seatbelt you would be found partially responsible for your injuries and comparatively negligent.
There are four different systems for deciding comparative negligence cases in the United States and depending upon the state you may receive partial compensation or no compensation. The different systems are: pure comparative negligence, pure modified comparative negligence, modified comparative negligence with a 50% bar rule, and modified comparative negligence with a 51% bar rule.
Pure Contributory Negligence
Negligence law of:
Virginia, Alabama, District of Columbia, North Carolina, Maryland
Pure Contributory Negligence: If the victim is found to be responsible for their own harm on any level the at-fault party will not be held liable.
For example, Linda hits Crystal’s car and Crystal is injured in the accident, but Crystal is found to be 10% responsible for her injuries- in this system she will receive no compensation for the damages because she had a minor role in her own injuries.
The pure contributory negligence system is based off of English laws but only 5 states in the United States continue to use this system while the other 45 have adopted more progressive laws.
Comparative Negligence
While contributory negligence provides no compensation for those found partially responsible for their injuries, in a comparative negligent system partially responsible parties are entitled to partial compensation. The level of compensation, however, depends on which system is used: pure comparative negligence or a modified comparative negligence.
Pure Comparative Negligence
Negligence law of
Washington State, Alaska, California, Arizona, Kentucky, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana,
Missouri, New York, New Mexico, Rhode Island, South Dakota
Pure Comparative Negligence: a system that compensates for damages based on the level of fault of each party. A percentage of guilt is determined by the judge or jury deciding the case which determines the percentage of compensation.
Example:
For example, Lauren and Tom have an accident, but the jury decides tom is 99% responsible for his own injuries because of his failure to wear a seatbelt. In a pure comparative negligence system Tom is then responsible for 99% of his $10,000 medical bills and Lauren is only required to pay for 1% or $100.00.
Modified Comparative Negligence-50% bar rule
Negligence Law of:
Colorado, Arkansas, Kansas, Georgia, Idaho, Maine, West Virginia,
Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah,
Modified Comparative Negligence- 50% bar rule: this law operates on the principle that if the victim is responsible for 49% or less of the damages they will be compensated. If, however, it is decided that the victim contributed to 50% or more of their own damages they will not be compensated.
Modified Comparative Negligence- 51% bar rule
Negligence Law of
:Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Wisconsin, Wyoming
Modified Comparative Negligence with a 51% bar rule: this version of the comparative negligence law only provides compensation if the victim is found at fault for 50% or less of the damage. If the victim is thought to be responsible for 51% of the damages or more he is awarded nothing.
Understanding auto accident laws can be challenging. If you have suffered injury in a car accident contact a Redmond personal injury attorney immediately to review your case. If you are in the Seattle area, contact our Bellevue personal injury law firm.
About the Author
Jason Epstein joined Premier Law Group as a partner in 2007. Jason is a litigator handling all types of personal injury cases with an emphasis on serious plaintiff’s personal injury and insurance coverage. Jason is a member of the Washington State Association for Justice and serves within its leadership. Jason often speaks at CLEs and serves as an arbitrator for both private and mandatory arbitration matters. Jason completed a certificate in Alternative Dispute Resolution from the Strauss Institute of Dispute Resolution and the Trial Advocacy program through the National Institute of Trial Advocacy. Jason has been dedicated to representing injured people since 1999. Jason Epstein has been representing individuals against insurance companies and large corporations since 2001. He limits his practice to personal injury and wrongful death cases including auto accidents, motorcycle accidents, or other serious and catastrophic injuries. Hopefully you have already visited StraightTalkLaw.com. This website is loaded with tons of information, and is constantly updated to keep you informed of recent developments. You can also stay up to date by following the blogs which are linked toStraightTalkLaw.com Jason understands that providing the best legal representation to his clients means limiting the number of cases he accepts. He takes fewer cases so he has more time for you. By limiting his caseload, Mr. Epstein is able to give each client and each case the time and attention that they deserve. If you would like to see if your case qualifies for Mr. Epstein to represent you, please contact us throughStraightTalkLaw.com, request one or more of Jason’s books, or call us toll free at (888) 333-1873.
Rating: Not yet rated
Comments
No comments posted.Add Comment
You do not have permission to comment. If you log in, you may be able to comment.