Contributory Negligence vs. Pure Comparative Fault

Determining liability in a personal injury claim is never a simple matter. Historically speaking, most personal injury claims were determined using a system that was known as contributory negligence. By using this rule of thumb, an injured party would not be able to seek financial compensation if it was determined that they were somewhat at fault for the accident occurring – even if that was determined to be as low as 1% of liability.

This, however, was determined to not be a completely fair process and thus other measures of damages were investigated. (There are still five states that currently following pure contributory negligence). Other states, like California, have opted for rules that take the proportion of fault into consideration when looking into awarding damages to the injured parties.

In California, pure comparative fault is used. Under this measure, damages for an injured party are not taken away should any fault be determined. Instead, they are reduced proportionally to the amount of fault that they are determined to have. For example, should a victim be determined to be 20% at fault for a car accident that occurred, they would only be eligible to receive 80% of the damages that the accident was valued at.

If you are currently facing a personal injury claim, we encourage you to contact Pacific Attorney Group as soon as possible. At our firm, we have proven that we are true advocates for the rights of the accused and have shown that we can be trusted in even the most complex of cases. We have an extensive knowledge of personal injury law and are prepared to go the distance in for our clients. You can be confident knowing that if you have a Los Angeles personal injury lawyer from our firm on your side that you will be fully protected to the full extent of the law. Call today!