When an accident happens and you are injured as a result, you need to know how the accident was caused and who is responsible. Sometimes, determining cause and liability is straightforward when one person clearly caused the accident. Other times, fault can be more complicated. In a multi-vehicle car accident, for example, different drivers could have different levels of responsibility.
Contributory fault involves the division of responsibility after an accident. When different parties are involved, each might share some percentage of liability for the accident. Depending on what state you live in, the percentage of fault a victim shares for the accident can affect their financial recovery. Florida follows a modified comparative fault standard, allowing accident victims to recover financial compensation even if they shared a percentage of blame for an accident.
Here, we’ll take a look at different types of contributory fault and comparative fault, as well as how Florida accident victims are affected.
Types of Contributory Fault
There are three main fault schemes in personal injury law:
- Contributory negligence
- Pure comparative negligence
- Modified comparative negligence
Contributory fault laws control whether an accident victim who was partially at fault in the accident can be compensated by the other party for their injuries. When multiple individuals played a role in the accident, comparative fault rules can determine how much each party would be entitled to receive from others. Each state in the U.S. follows one of the approaches noted above, and your compensation would depend on which comparative fault law your state observes.
Contributory Negligence
Under the contributory negligence model, accident victims who are even 1% responsible for the accident cannot collect damages for their injuries. Many states, including Florida, followed this approach in the past. Currently, only Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, Alabama, and Washington, D.C., use contributory negligence rules. This harsh approach requires accident victims to be 100% blame-free in order to collect fair compensation for their losses in an accident. Defendants and insurance companies will pounce on any reason to defeat a claim based on the accident victim’s actions. Most states have wisely phased out this approach.
Pure Comparative Fault
On the other side of the spectrum is pure comparative negligence, or pure comparative fault. Under this theory, even if an accident victim was more responsible than the other party, they can still collect damages from the other party. For example, if a driver was using their phone before a car accident and was found to be 75% at fault for the accident, they could still seek damages from the driver who was 25% at fault. However, the amount they could collect would be reduced or limited to factor in their share of fault. Several states, including New York and California, follow the pure comparative negligence standard.
Modified Comparative Negligence
Modified comparative negligence is a middle ground between classic contributory negligence and the pure comparative negligence standards. Under modified comparative negligence, injured victims can collect damages if they share fault for the accident. However, most states following this approach forbid collection if the victim’s share of fault was more than 50% or 51%. Under Florida’s comparative fault law, a claimant’s responsibility can not be greater than 50% for the accident. As long as they were 50% or less at fault, an accident victim can still pursue monetary damages from the other side.
Most states follow the modified comparative negligence rule. In these situations, a victim’s potential compensation would be reduced in proportion to their share of fault. For example, a driver found 40% at fault in a claim worth $100,000 would see their compensation reduced to $60,000. An experienced Florida personal injury lawyer will fight to reduce their client’s percentage of liability and maximize their financial payout.
Proving Negligence in a Personal Injury Claim
In comparative fault states, plaintiffs must prove negligence by the defendant to collect damages. Negligence includes four basic elements:
- Duty: It must be shown that the at-fault party had a duty of care to the plaintiff and others, given the situation.
- Breach: Breach of duty happens when someone doesn’t use the care and caution they are expected to under the circumstances.
- Causation: There must be a direct cause & effect between a breach of duty and the plaintiff’s injuries.
- Damages: Actual damages such as injury, medical bills, lost wages, and other losses are an essential element.
A personal injury lawyer can help you gather evidence and prove all of the above elements of negligence.
Proving Fault in an Accident
Proving fault requires a full investigation into how the accident happened, why it happened, and who was at fault. Your goal as the claimant is to prove that someone else (or multiple individuals) shared more fault than you did in the accident. Florida law requires claimants to prove their fault was 50% or less for an accident. An experienced lawyer will use all available evidence to explain the other party’s percentage of fault and why they are liable for your damages.
Contact a Tampa Personal Injury Lawyer for a Free Consultation
If you were hurt in a serious accident in Tampa or elsewhere in Florida, you could be entitled to financial help through a personal injury claim. The amount you can collect can be impacted by your contributory fault under Florida’s modified comparative negligence law. A skilled Tampa personal injury lawyer can help you navigate your next steps and use comparative fault to your advantage. Contact Mincone Personal Injury Lawyers at (813) 800-0810 to schedule your free consultation today.
