What Does Modified Comparative Negligence Mean?

If you’re reading up personal injury law, it’s likely you’ve come across a few confusing legal terms. You might be wondering, “What does modified comparative negligence mean? And what does it mean for my  personal injury case?”

Read on for a concise breakdown of the concepts behind modified comparative negligence. 

The Relationship Between Fault and Negligence

Fault is a core legal concept that comes to bear in most civil lawsuits. We tend to think of fault in a manner similar to movie heroes and villains—it’s what separates the good guy from the bad guy in any given accident or damaging event, right?

The answer is: Well, sort of. Although it’s possible your damages were the unique responsibility of someone else, a jury or insurance adjuster might see it differently. 

Demonstrating that someone acted negligently is a key part of proving fault in civil law, but these other elements also come into play:

• Duty — Did the defendant owe the plaintiff a legal duty of care? 
• Breach of Duty — Did the defendant flout that duty by taking an action (or failing to take an action) that another reasonable person in their position would have?
• Causation — Did a defendant’s failure to uphold their duty cause the event at hand? (This is where negligence can apply.) 
• Damages — Did the defendant’s actions cause damages to the plaintiff? 

Whether you’ve sustained damages from a car accident, a workplace injury, medical malpractice, or some other incident, these are the elements needed to prove that another party is at fault. 

Pure Contributory and Pure Comparative Negligence

Depending on the state you live in, there are different standards of negligence. If we take the example of a car accident victim suing the at-fault party for damages, we can start to see how these different standards can cause dramatic differences, depending on which is applied. 

Some states practice pure contributory negligence, which means that if you are found to be even one percent responsible for the accident, you are unable to sue for damages. 

Other states adhere to pure comparative negligence, meaning that a defendant is entitled to the sum of their damages in a settlement minus the percent for which they are at fault. So if you, the victim, believe your damages to be worth $10,000 but are later found to be 25 percent at fault, you will receive no more than $7,500. 

Modified Comparative Negligence

Finally, modified comparative negligence—which is observed in Illinois and the majority of state jurisdictions—says that the same car accident victim can collect damages so long as they are not found to be majority liable for the accident. 

In other words, if you can prove that you are less than 51 percent responsible for the accident, you have a case for collecting damages in a civil suit. 

For this reason, a plaintiff living in a modified comparative negligence state like Illinois is encouraged to retain the services of an experienced attorney, as a failure to establish the defendant’s fault in one of these states could mean walking away with nothing. 

Speak with a Personal Injury Lawyer

Proving fault can be complicated. If you live in a modified comparative negligence state, it can also be the difference between receiving fair compensation for your damages and walking away empty-handed. The personal injury attorneys at Mahoney & Mahoney, LLC want to help you win the settlement you deserve in Illinois. 

Want to speak to an experienced attorney in Rockford, Illinois? Call 815-656-4600 or fill out the form below for a free, no-hassle consultation.