Contributory vs. Comparative Negligence
David Muñoz | November 8, 2024 | Personal Injury
If you harm someone due to negligent behavior, you should be responsible for covering the damages caused. With adequate insurance, your insurance company would handle these costs; however, since you pay the monthly premiums, you may still feel the impact—especially if your rates increase following an accident.
But what happens if more than one party is to blame for an accident? In a car accident, for example, if you were driving the wrong way down a one-way street, and the other driver was driving at night with their lights off. Who pays for the accident, and how much do they pay? Different states resolve problems like this in different ways.
Pure Comparative Negligence
Pure comparative negligence is a legal concept that adjusts a party’s financial recovery based on their percentage of fault in an accident. In this system, each party’s compensation for damages is reduced by the exact percentage they are at fault, regardless of how high that percentage may be. For instance, if you were 25% responsible for an accident, you would recover only 75% of your total damages while losing 25% due to your share of the fault. Similarly, if you were 67% at fault, you would lose 67% of your damages and receive only 33% of the total. This is the system that California uses.
Courts determine these percentages if the plaintiff files a lawsuit. Otherwise, the negotiating parties compromise to determine the percentages.
Modified Comparative Negligence With a 50% Bar
Modified comparative negligence with a 50% bar is similar to pure comparative negligence but includes a critical rule: if a party is 50% or more responsible for an accident, they cannot recover any damages. This rule is often used to prevent those who are equally or primarily at fault from receiving compensation.
For example, if one party is 35% responsible and the other party is 65% responsible, the party who is 35% at fault can still recover damages. They would lose 35% of their own damages due to their share of the fault but could recover the remaining 65%. However, because the other party is 65% at fault—more than the 50% threshold—they would be barred from receiving any damages. In this way, the 50% bar limits recovery only to those who are less at fault than the other party.
Modified Comparative Negligence With a 51% Bar
Modified comparative negligence with a 51% bar works like modified comparative negligence with a 50% bar, except that the bar is 51% instead of 50%. This means that if you are 50%, you can still recover 50% of your damages, but if you are any more than 50% responsible, you cannot recover at all.
Contributory Negligence
Contributory negligence is an uncompromising system that used to prevail all over the United States. These days only Alabama, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, and the District of Columbia use it.
Under contributory negligence, if a party is found to be even slightly at fault for an accident, they are typically barred from recovering any damages from the other party. This means that a party who is 99% at fault for an accident would receive nothing. Conversely, a party who is 1% at fault would also be unable to recover any damages from the other party, meaning they would have to bear 100% of their own damages.
The only situation in which a party would pay another party’s damages is if one party is found to be 100% responsible for the accident. In such a case, the fully responsible party would be liable for all damages incurred by the other party. This strict rule can lead to harsh outcomes, as even minimal fault can preclude recovery entirely.
No-Fault (PIP) Auto Insurance States
A dozen states, such as Kentucky and Florida, apply a no-fault system to car accidents (but not other types of injury cases). Drivers purchase their own personal injury insurance, which they rely on to cover their own injuries unless these injuries reach “serious” status under state law. At that point, the “fault” system takes over, and courts distribute damages according to each state’s law (pure comparative negligence, for instance, in New York).
The California Malpractice Cap
In California, as of 2024, the limit for non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases was $500,000 for personal injury and $750,000 for wrongful death. These limits will increase until 2033 when they will reach $750,000 for personal injury and $1 million for wrongful death.
A San Diego Personal Injury Lawyer Can Make All the Difference
Yes, you might “win” your case without a lawyer. But think about the difference between negotiating a $16,000 settlement and negotiating an $87,000 settlement. That’s the kind of difference a good San Diego personal injury lawyer can make, although there can be no guarantees. Contact Mission Personal Injury Lawyers today to schedule a free consultation and discuss your case.
Contact the San Diego Personal Injury Law Firm of Mission Personal Injury Lawyers Today To Get More Information
If you’ve been injured in San Diego or Chula Vista, please call Mission Personal Injury Lawyers for a free case evaluation with a personal injury lawyer or contact us online.
We proudly serve San Diego County and throughout California.
Mission Personal Injury Lawyers
2515 Camino del Rio S Suite 350, San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 777-5555
Mission Personal Injury Lawyers – Chula Vista Office
690 Otay Lakes Rd #130, Chula Vista, CA 91910
(619) 722-3032
We also serve the state of Texas. Contact our personal injury law office in El Paso for legal assistance today.
Mission Personal Injury Lawyers – El Paso Office
201 E Main Suite 106, El Paso, Texas 79901
(915) 591-1000
