100% Secure and Confidential
100% Secure and Confidential
A car accident is often more than a simple “fender bender.” If you are a driver or passenger involved in such an accident, you may have sustained serious injuries that require extended medical treatment and rehabilitation. There may also be substantial damage to your car and other personal property. Additionally, there may be ongoing physical pain and emotional trauma to deal with.
Under Georgia personal injury law, the negligent driver who causes a car accident can be held financially responsible for these and other losses arising from an accident. However, determining a negligent driver’s liability is not always cut-and-dry. If you sue a driver for causing an accident, for instance, they could turn around and argue that it was your actions that caused–or at least contributed to–the collision. And such arguments may prove effective due to Georgia’s comparative negligence rules.
Fault vs. No-Fault and Contributory vs. Comparative Negligence
Every state handles car accident liability slightly differently. Some states, such as Florida, follow what is often referred to as a “no-fault” system. What this means is that every driver is responsible for carrying their insurance policy, which provides medical and other benefits for themselves and their passengers in the event of an accident. The policy is considered “no-fault” because it does not matter who was responsible for the accident. The no-fault carrier is liable regardless of fault. In limited cases, typically where the accident results in death or a “serious” injury, the victims can go outside of their no-fault insurance and sue a negligent driver directly.
Most states, including Georgia, follow an at-fault system. As the name suggests, this is a system where the negligent driver can always be held financially responsible for causing an accident. The victim does not have to seek coverage under their insurance policy first.
The majority of states that use an at-fault system in car accidents can be further divided into three subcategories:
- Contributory Negligence: A state that follows contributory negligence, such as Alabama, forbids a plaintiff from recovering damages in a personal injury claim if they share any degree of fault for a car accident. In other words, even if the defendant was 99 percent responsible if the plaintiff was 1 percent at fault, they recovered nothing.
- Pure Comparative Fault: At the opposite end of the spectrum are states, such as Mississippi and Kentucky, that follow a pure comparative fault rule. This is where a plaintiff’s recovery is reduced in proportion to their fault, but they can still recover something regardless of their fault. So to take an extreme example, a plaintiff who was 99 percent at fault could still theoretically recover 1 percent of their losses from the defendant under pure comparative vault.
- Modified Comparative Fault: The majority of states, including Georgia, follow some form of comparative fault. This is where a plaintiff may be partially at fault but can still recover damages, provided the plaintiff’s fault does not exceed a certain statutory threshold.
Concerning modified comparative fault, some states follow a 50-percent rule while others follow a 51-percent rule. Georgia’s modified comparative fault rule is 50 percent. In simple terms, this means the plaintiff’s comparative fault must be less than 50 percent to recover compensation from a negligent defendant.
Who Determines Comparative Fault in LaGrange, Georgia?
If a personal injury case goes to trial in LaGrange, Georgia, it is up to the “trier of fact” to consider the evidence and apportion fault among all of the parties. In most cases, the trier of fact is a jury. (If both sides waive a jury trial, the trier of fact is the judge.) Strictly speaking, there is no set formula or method a jury must use to apportion fault. It is largely left to the jury’s discretion, experience, and judgment.
Keep in mind, that the trier of fact must also determine a plaintiff’s damages arising from a car accident. It is then the role of the judge to apply any finding of comparative negligence to the award of damages. Consider a hypothetical car accident where the jury finds the plaintiff suffered a total of $200,000 due to a car accident. The jury also determined the plaintiff was 20 percent at fault for the accident. Under Georgia’s modified comparative negligence rule, the plaintiff is entitled to receive 80 percent of their damages–$160,000–from the defendant as compensation.
Contact a LaGrange, Georgia Car Accident Lawyer Today
Georgia’s comparative negligence rule emphasizes the importance of conducting a full investigation into a car accident before pursuing a compensation claim. An experienced LaGrange car accident lawyer can assist you in conducting such an investigation and taking appropriate legal action against the responsible parties. Call Moffitt Law, LLC, today at 762-200-2924 to schedule a free consultation.
