Comparative and Contributory Negligence in Car Accidents

While many Illinois car crashes are caused by only one party, sometimes liability is not as clear. Knowing how contributory and comparative negligence can impact your potential compensation for your injuries is essential.

The Illinois car accident attorneys at Salvi, Schostok & Pritchard P.C. understand the state’s comparative negligence rules and how they apply to personal injury cases. Call us to learn everything you need to know about Illinois comparative negligence law.

Get help from the nearest car accident attorney in Chicago

Why Working with an Experienced Car Accident Lawyer Matters When Dealing with Comparative Negligence Cases

If you sustained injuries in a car crash where you and the other driver may both have contributed to the crash, working with an experienced car crash lawyer is crucial. In Illinois, if your percentage of fault exceeds a certain threshold, you might lose your right to recover damages. Even if you are only partially at fault for the crash, the other driver’s insurance could reduce your compensation based on your degree of fault.

A skilled lawyer plays a vital role in collecting and presenting evidence to show that the other driver was mostly or entirely responsible for a crash. Your lawyer’s efforts can significantly affect the outcome of your case by seeking the maximum possible compensation. Furthermore, if the other party claims that you caused the crash, a lawyer can effectively defend you against these unfounded accusations. They can help ensure that an insurance company or court hears your side of the story while supporting your claim with solid evidence. This legal support is essential to handle the complex details of comparative negligence laws and help you reach the best possible outcome.

What Is Contributory Negligence?

Contributory negligence is a legal concept that refers to situations where an individual involved in an accident is also partly to blame for what happened. The contributory negligence doctrine argues that when someone contributes to their own injuries in an incident, the other party should not be responsible for paying for the injured party’s losses.

In states that apply a pure contributory negligence rule, plaintiffs are barred from recovering damages if the evidence shows they contributed to the accident in any way, no matter how small. This strict rule emphasizes the importance of proving that you were not at fault if you wish to claim compensation. Fortunately, Illinois is not a contributory negligence state. Your right to obtain compensation might not be extinguished just because you may have partially contributed to the crash.

What Is Pure Comparative Fault?

The pure comparative negligence rule is the opposite of the doctrine of contributory negligence. In pure comparative negligence states, a plaintiff can recover compensation for their injuries no matter their degree of fault, as long as they are not fully responsible for a crash. So, even if a driver bears most of the liability for a collision, they can still seek compensation for their injuries. However, compensation will be reduced by the plaintiff’s percentage of fault.

What Is Modified Comparative Fault?

Modified comparative fault (also called modified comparative negligence) is a legal doctrine that allows a plaintiff to recover damages in a personal injury claim as long as their degree of fault falls below a certain percentage. If the plaintiff’s share of the fault exceeds the legal threshold, they lose the right to collect any compensation from other at-fault parties. Illinois statutes say that the threshold for personal injury claims is 50 percent, meaning drivers can only claim compensation if their degree of fault is 50 percent or less.

If someone is 50 percent or less to blame for a collision, the amount of compensation they can recover is reduced by their percentage of fault. For example, if an injured party is 30 percent responsible for a crash, and the total compensation they’re awarded amounts to $100,000, they would be eligible to receive $70,000, reflecting a 30 percent reduction based on their degree of fault. This system aims to balance the compensation awarded with the actual responsibility each party bears for causing the crash.

Examples of Contributory, Comparative, and Modified Comparative Negligence

Contributory negligence laws, comparative fault rules, and modified comparative negligence rules are all legal doctrines that apply when the plaintiff and defendant share fault for a collision. The main difference between these different rules is whether a plaintiff can recover compensation if they acted negligently, too. The jury determines the defendant’s negligence, the plaintiff’s negligence, and the negligence of other parties when considering fault and awarding damages.

Here are some hypothetical examples of how the doctrines of pure contributory negligence, pure comparative negligence, and modified comparative negligence work in the context of a car crash:

Pure Contributory Negligence

Imagine a driver who runs a red light and hits another car that was crossing legally. Suppose the driver who was hit was also speeding slightly during the time of the crash. Their speed placed them in front of the car that ran the red light, positioning them where they otherwise would not have been. Under pure contributory negligence, the driver who was hit cannot claim any damages because they contributed to the collision by speeding, even though the defendant was mostly responsible for the crash.

Pure Comparative Negligence

In a different scenario, if a car fails to yield at a stop sign and collides with a speeding vehicle, under pure comparative negligence, each driver’s compensation is reduced by their respective degree of fault. If one driver is 70 percent at fault and the other 30 percent, each can still recover compensation, but their amounts would be adjusted according to their fault levels.

Modified Comparative Negligence

Consider another case where a texting driver hits a vehicle making an illegal turn. If the texting driver is 40 percent at fault and the turning driver 60 percent, under modified comparative negligence, the texting driver can recover damages for 60 percent of their compensable losses from the other driver since their fault is 50 percent or less. However, the driver who made the illegal turn can’t recover anything because their degree of fault exceeds the 50 percent threshold under Illinois’ comparative negligence law.

How to Prove Fault in a Car Crash

Proving fault for an Illinois car crash requires you to provide evidence showing how the accident happened and how the other driver failed to act with reasonable care to avoid a collision. Some common types of evidence that can help substantiate your case include:

• Police reports
• Medical records
• Eyewitness accounts
• Surveillance footage
• Photos from the crash scene
• Expert testimony
• Forensic accident analysis

An experienced personal injury attorney can help obtain this evidence on your behalf.

Contact Our Illinois Car Accident Attorneys Now

Illinois law gives you two years from the date of a car crash to file a lawsuit, making timely legal action vital. Call Salvi, Schostok & Pritchard P.C. today or reach out online for a free case review to learn more about how we can help.