Immediately after a high-speed auto accident, anyone involved may struggle to determine exactly what happened, why events unfolded the way they did, and who should be held legally at fault for the wreck. However, to recover financially for injuries you suffered in a car crash, you will need to prove that another party was to blame for causing the accident, and often, that you played no role in causing it.
You may learn that comparative negligence in Fresno car accident claims can significantly reduce the compensation you deserve, sometimes by hundreds or even thousands of dollars, which you otherwise would have been entitled to receive. Fortunately, you can often challenge these accusations made by the defendant(s) you are suing, especially with support from a qualified car accident attorney such as those at Valero Law Group, which can be key to doing that effectively. Call today for answers to your questions.
What Is Comparative Negligence?
In legal contexts, comparative negligence refers to the extent to which an injured person, filing a personal injury claim, contributed to their injury through negligent behavior. In Fresno car accident cases, courts apply comparative negligence by assigning a percentage of fault to each party and reducing the value of their final damage award accordingly. For example, if a plaintiff is 25 percent at fault, they may recover only 75 percent of their injury-related losses.
Fortunately, this state follows a pure comparative fault system, which allows an injured person to seek compensation from another party, even if they share some fault, unless they are 100 percent responsible. In most states, the law prohibits individuals who hold the majority of fault for their injuries from recovering compensation. A few states go further by denying recovery to anyone who bears any percentage of fault, however slight, for their injuries.
Effective Defenses Against Comparative Fault Allegations
One essential thing to understand about the role comparative negligence plays in Fresno car crash claims is that it measures how much an injured person directly contributed to causing their injuries, not how broadly irresponsible they were during the incident. For example, if a driver were rear-ended at a red light while texting, their phone use while behind the wheel would likely violate state law, but it would not likely qualify as comparative fault, since it did not directly cause the accident.
Many successful defenses against accusations of comparative fault focus on showing that a particular irresponsible act did not meaningfully contribute to the plaintiff’s injuries. Alternatively, a skilled lawyer can help to establish that the available evidence fails to show it is more likely than not that a particular instance of comparative negligence occurred at all. Contact the legal team at Valero Law Group to learn more.
Call Today To Learn More About Comparative Negligence in Auto Accident Claims From a Fresno Attorney
Hearing that you were partly or primarily at fault for your car wreck can be immensely upsetting. Still, staying calm and proactive is essential, overreacting may be used as further evidence of your irresponsibility.
The car accident lawyers at Valero Law Group know precisely how to prevent comparative negligence in Fresno car accident claims from limiting your right to pursue compensation. Call today to learn more.
Valero Law Group
N/a