When motorcyclists share fault for accidents, comparative negligence rules determine how shared blame affects compensation. Understanding these rules helps riders protect their claims even when they contributed to crashes.
Understanding Comparative Fault
Comparative fault acknowledges that multiple parties can contribute to accidents. Rather than all-or-nothing outcomes, damages are allocated based on each party's share of responsibility.
Your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault. If you're 20% responsible and damages total $100,000, you recover $80,000.
This represents a fairer approach than older contributory negligence rules that barred any recovery if you were even slightly at fault.
Types of Comparative Fault Systems
Pure comparative fault allows recovery regardless of your fault percentage. Even if you're 90% at fault, you can recover 10% of damages. About 13 states follow this approach.
Modified comparative fault (50% bar) allows recovery if you're 50% or less at fault. If you're 51% or more responsible, you recover nothing. Most states use this system.
Modified comparative fault (51% bar) allows recovery if you're 49% or less at fault. At 50% fault, recovery is barred. Several states follow this variation.
Common Motorcycle Fault Arguments
Defense attorneys argue speeding contributed to accidents - either causing crashes or preventing avoidance of hazards created by others.
Lane position arguments claim riders were in blind spots, making them harder to see. Proper lane positioning is taught but not legally required.
Inattention or distraction - not watching traffic properly - may be attributed to riders who 'didn't see' hazards.
Lack of visibility gear or inadequate lighting may be cited as contributing factors, especially in night or low-light accidents.
Countering Fault Arguments
Evidence of safe riding practices rebuts comparative fault claims. Witnesses who observed you riding responsibly strengthen your position.
Accident reconstruction can determine actual speeds and prove you weren't speeding as defendants claim.
Even if you were slightly speeding, demonstrate that the other driver's negligence was the primary cause and your speed didn't substantially contribute.
How Fault Percentages Are Determined
In settlements, fault is negotiated between parties based on evidence. Strong evidence supporting your position reduces attributed fault.
At trial, juries determine fault percentages for each party. They hear evidence and apportion blame accordingly.
Judges may determine fault in bench trials or when ruling on summary judgment motions.
Evidence Affecting Fault Allocation
Police reports may assign fault or describe contributing factors. While not binding, they influence negotiations and jury perceptions.
Traffic citations to either party provide strong fault evidence. Violations directly related to the crash establish responsibility.
Witness testimony about what each party did before the crash helps establish who acted negligently.
Physical evidence - skid marks, damage patterns, debris fields - helps reconstruct what happened and who caused it.
Motorcycle-Specific Bias
Motorcyclists sometimes face unfair fault attribution based on stereotypes rather than evidence. Some jurors assume riders are reckless.
Your attorney combats bias by presenting you as a responsible rider - safety training, proper gear, clean driving record.
Humanizing the rider - showing family, career, community involvement - counters negative motorcycle stereotypes.
Impact of Comparative Fault on Damages
Fault percentage directly reduces all damage categories - medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering all decrease proportionally.
In modified comparative fault states, crossing the threshold means total loss. Being found 51% (or 50%) at fault eliminates recovery entirely.
Minor fault differences matter significantly. 5% fault might seem minor but represents substantial money in serious injury cases.
Multiple Defendant Situations
When multiple parties share fault, allocation among defendants affects what you can collect from each.
Joint and several liability in some states lets you collect from any defendant regardless of their fault percentage. This protects you when some defendants are uninsured or judgment-proof.
Other states require collecting proportionally from each defendant based on their fault percentage.
Minimizing Comparative Fault
Document your safe riding. Gather witness statements supporting your conduct. Photos of your gear demonstrate safety consciousness.
Avoid admissions at the scene. Don't say anything suggesting you were at fault. Statements can be used against you.
Work with attorneys who know how to counter fault arguments and present evidence minimizing your attributed responsibility.
Even with some fault, pursue your claim. Partial recovery in serious cases can still mean substantial compensation.