After an accident, fault is not always entirely one-sided.
A driver may have been speeding when another vehicle turned in front of them. A customer injured in a fall may have been looking at a phone when encountering a dangerous condition. An insurance company may argue that an injured person could have done something differently to avoid getting hurt.
In Michigan, being partially responsible for an accident does not necessarily eliminate a personal injury claim. Instead, the state uses a comparative negligence system that can reduce the damages an injured person receives.
What Is Comparative Negligence?
Comparative negligence means responsibility for an injury can be divided among multiple people.
Michigan law requires the factfinder to allocate fault among those whose conduct contributed to the injury. The injured person’s damages are then reduced according to that person’s percentage of fault.
Suppose you suffer $100,000 in damages and are found 20% responsible for the accident. Under the comparative-fault rule, the damages would generally be reduced by 20%, leaving $80,000.
That makes the percentage of fault assigned to each party an important part of a personal injury case.
What Happens If You’re More Than 50% at Fault?
Michigan has an especially important rule when an injured person bears the majority of the responsibility.
Under MCL 600.2959, if your percentage of fault is greater than the combined fault of the other responsible persons, noneconomic damages cannot be awarded.
Noneconomic damages generally compensate for losses that do not come with a straightforward bill, such as pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, and loss of enjoyment of life.
But being more than 50% at fault does not necessarily eliminate every type of recovery.
Economic damages, like qualifying medical expenses or lost income, are instead reduced according to your percentage of comparative fault.
For example, someone found 60% responsible would generally lose the ability to recover noneconomic damages but could potentially recover 40% of otherwise recoverable economic damages.
What If You’re Exactly 50% at Fault?
The wording of Michigan’s statute matters.
The cutoff applies when the injured person is greater than 50% at fault. Therefore, being exactly 50% responsible does not trigger the statutory bar on noneconomic damages.
However, the damages would still be reduced by the injured person’s 50% share of fault.
Even a relatively small difference in the allocation of responsibility can therefore have a substantial effect on a claim.
How Do Insurance Companies Use Comparative Fault?
Comparative negligence often becomes an important issue during insurance negotiations.
An insurer might argue that an injured driver was speeding, following too closely, or distracted. In a premises liability case, it might argue that the injured person ignored a visible hazard.
These allegations can affect settlement negotiations because a higher percentage of fault can substantially reduce the potential recovery.
However, an insurance adjuster’s fault determination is not necessarily the final word. Evidence can be used to challenge the insurer’s version of events.
What Evidence Can Establish Fault?
Because percentages matter, evidence from the accident can become critical.
Depending on the case, useful evidence may include photographs and video, police reports, witness statements, vehicle damage, surveillance footage, medical records, electronic vehicle data, and accident-scene measurements.
Preserving evidence promptly can be particularly important when surveillance recordings may be overwritten or physical conditions at the accident scene may change.
Statements made immediately after an accident can also affect a later dispute. Avoid guessing about what happened or accepting blame for events you do not yet fully understand.
What About Michigan Car Accident Claims?
Auto accident cases have additional rules.
Michigan’s no-fault system limits when an injured person can recover noneconomic damages from an at-fault driver. Generally, the injured person must have suffered death, permanent serious disfigurement, or a serious impairment of body function before pursuing those damages.
Comparative fault then becomes another issue that can affect the tort claim.
This means a Michigan car accident case may involve both the no-fault threshold and the percentage of responsibility assigned for the crash.
Legal Guidance
Duff Law is here to help you. Make sure you reach out for your consultation today.