Car accidents in Florida may have two or more drivers at fault for causing the crash. An injured driver who shares some of the blame for the accident may pursue litigation against the other driver(s) to obtain a financial recovery for their harm and loss. However, Florida law applies a comparative negligence rule to car accident cases, which can affect an injured driver’s right to seek compensation in a claim against another driver. But how does comparative negligence work in a car accident claim in Florida?
Understanding Comparative Negligence in Florida
The comparative negligence rule seeks to apportion financial liability for injuries caused by an accident between the parties at fault for the accident, which may include the injured person seeking compensation. Comparative negligence allows an injured party to pursue financial recovery even for an accident they bear partial fault for causing.
Florida uses a modified comparative negligence rule, which caps the share of fault that a plaintiff in a car accident case may have while remaining eligible for compensation. Under Florida’s system, a plaintiff may not pursue a compensation claim after a car accident if they bear more than 50 percent of the fault for the accident and their injuries. However, the modified comparative negligence rule can affect an eligible plaintiff’s financial recovery by reducing it in proportion to the share of fault they bear for the accident.
Determining Fault in Car Accident Cases
Insurers and juries may rely on various pieces of evidence to determine what happened in a car accident, identify the parties at fault for the crash, and apportion liability for the accident to each at-fault party. A determination of fault for a car accident may depend on evidence such as:
- Police accident reports
- Citation or arrest records
- Accident scene photos and videos
- Surveillance or traffic camera footage
- Dashcam footage
- Eyewitness statements or cell phone footage
- Vehicle inspection or repair reports
- Event data recorder (“black box”) logs
- Accident reconstruction reports and testimony
Effect of Comparative Negligence on Compensation
The comparative negligence rule will reduce a partially at-fault car accident plaintiff’s financial recovery in proportion to their share of liability for the crash or their injuries. For example, suppose a plaintiff incurred $100,000 in losses for an accident that a jury finds them 20 percent at fault for. In that case, the court will reduce the plaintiff’s financial award in the judgment to $80,000, deducting $20,000 to reflect their 20 percent share of fault for the accident. This apportionment of financial liability applies to both economic losses (e.g., medical bills, lost wages) and non-economic losses (e.g., pain and suffering). However, when a Florida driver bears more than 50 percent of the fault for a car accident, they cannot recover compensation under the state’s modified comparative negligence rule, and the court will enter judgment for the defendant(s) in the car accident lawsuit.
Why Legal Help Matters
Because the comparative negligence rule can reduce or eliminate your right to compensation in a Florida car accident claim, you need experienced legal advocacy to protect your rights and interests, especially when the other driver or the insurance company puts some of the blame for the crash on you. An attorney can investigate the accident to recover evidence showing that the other driver(s) bear more or all of the fault for the car accident, thereby maximizing your financial recovery.
Contact a Car Accident Lawyer Today
When you suffer injuries and property damage in an accident while driving in Florida, any partial fault you bear for causing the crash can influence your financial recovery. Contact Hutch Firm today for a free, no-obligation consultation with a motor vehicle accident attorney to learn more about how Florida’s comparative negligence rule may affect your legal rights after you get into a crash with another car.