A Legal Guide to Georgia Comparative Fault and Contributory Negligence in Car Accident Cases
Key Points:
- In Georgia, comparative negligence can apply to determine the percentage of fault assigned to each driver in a disputed liability case. A jury award may be reduced by the percentage of fault applied to the party seeking civil damages.
- Comparative negligence is sometimes argued by lawyers and adjusters when when negotiating the appropriate settlement amount in personal injury cases.
- Georgia uses Modified Comparative Fault, which means that a claimant must be less than 50% at fault for the accident, to be entitled to be compensated. Damages may be reduced from there by the percentage that a Court or Jury finds the Plaintiff contributed to causing the accident.
Table of Contents
Understanding the Difference: No-Fault vs. At-Fault (Tort) States
States across the U.S. generally use either “no-fault” or “at-fault” systems. No-fault states require each driver’s insurance to pay for their own injuries and damages, no matter who was responsible for the accident. This means that even if another driver caused the accident, your own insurance would cover your medical bills and other associated costs.
Georgia is an “at-fault” State. At-fault states require the at-fault driver pay the claim, meaning they bear the financial burden. That is, a person at fault in Georgia will generally be responsible for paying the victim’s damages and medical expenses.
Georgia is a Modified Comparative Fault State, using the “50% Rule”
In Georgia, a party cannot recover damages if they are 50% or more at fault in causing a crash. Below that threshold, they recover damages minus their percentage of fault. For example, if the jury awards $10,000 in damages, but finds the Plaintiff 40% at fault, the verdict is reduced to a $6,000 recovery.
States that follow this rule include Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.
How Might Comparative Negligence Apply in Real-Life?
Here are some examples showing how Comparative Negligence may apply in a Georgia car accident:
- Left Turn Conundrum: A driver makes a left turn in front of a speeding motorcycle. Both drivers share some blame, but one carries a greater share of fault.
- Dusk Dilemma: At dusk, a pick-up truck driver makes a left turn in front of an oncoming car with its headlights turned off.
- Illegal U-Turn: A driver slows down and attempts an illegal U-turn but is hit by a driver trying to illegally pass him from behind.
- Jaywalking Misjudgment: A driver sees a person jaywalking, but fails to take evasive action and hits the pedestrian.
- Distracted Driving vs. Red Light Run: An at-fault driver recklessly goes through a red traffic light, but the other driver is distracted by their cell phone and fails to see the oncoming car when it was possible to have avoided the crash altogether.
1201 West Peachtree Street #2339 Atlanta, GA 30309+1-770-212-3795$0-$100000Besides the exceptional service I have been receiving thus far, they sent me a card for my birthday! Such a class act and made for the best surprise! Thank you so much Millar Law Firm for the thoughtful gift!
If the insurance company can prove that you hold a certain percentage of the fault for the accident, it could indeed benefit them. Here’s why:
Under Georgia’s modified comparative fault rule, an injured party can only recover damages if they are found to be less than 50% at fault. Furthermore, if you’re found to be partly at fault, your total compensation will be reduced by your percentage of fault. For example, if you have $10,000 in damages but are found to be 20% at fault, your recovery would be reduced by $2,000, leaving you with $8,000. So, yes, it does benefit the insurance company to try to prove or argue that you own a portion of the fault for the car accident in Georgia.
Insurance adjusters might make a settlement offer that falls short of the full value of the case, arguing that the victim’s comparative negligence justifies a reduction. A skilled car accident attorney will argue for a more favorable settlement offer from the insurance adjuster or take the case to court.
Under Georgia statute 51-11-7 if a victim had the opportunity to avoid an accident through the exercise of ordinary care, his or her right to recover or her damages damages may be reduced. For instance, where an accident victim had the chance and the ability to halt or swerve to evade a collision with another driver who was driving negligently, the victims recovery may be reduced or even eliminated.
