A person is legally negligent when they act without reasonable care and, in turn, cause an injury to another person or property. On the road, when a driver’s negligence causes a car accident, the injured party may bring an action against the negligent driver for damages. All drivers are expected to act as a “reasonable person” would behind the wheel. This includes obeying all traffic laws, driving at a reasonable speed while accounting for traffic, weather, and road conditions, and being careful when encountering a pedestrian, bicycle, or other vehicle on the road. A driver is also expected to be alert, maintain control of their car, and maintain the car itself so that it is safe to drive.
However, even when a party negligently causes a car accident, they may still have some defenses available. Defenses often depend on the laws of the state where the accident occurred, but the most common ones are comparative and contributory negligence. Most states have a version of comparative negligence law on the books. The theory behind comparative negligence allows a defendant to apportion some of the fault for the accident to the plaintiff. Within comparative negligence law, states use two varieties: “pure comparative negligence” and “modified comparative negligence.”
In pure comparative negligence states, if the defendant can show that the plaintiff was in any way at fault for contributing to the accident, the defendant’s liability will be reduced by that apportioned percentage. For example, if the defendant shows that the plaintiff’s negligence was 70% responsible for the accident, the defendant will pay only 30% of the damages. On the other hand, in modified comparative negligence states, the plaintiff must show that the defendant was negligent to a particular degree or they will be barred from collecting any damages. For instance, in many modified comparative negligence states, the plaintiff can recover damages only if their negligence was less than that of the defendant. This means that if the defendant shows that the plaintiff was 51% negligent, the plaintiff will not be able to recover at all from the defendant. Lastly, several states still use the older defense theory of contributory negligence. This theory is the strictest against plaintiffs, as the plaintiff is unable to recover damages if the defendant proves that the plaintiff was negligent to any degree – even 1%.
Because comparative and contributory negligence defenses are complex and can greatly affect the strategy of the case for both sides, it’s important for either party to consult an experienced personal injury attorney for assistance. A personal injury attorney has expert knowledge of state negligence law and will help ensure that the interests of their client are addressed.