Determining Fault in Car Crash Claims

Car accidents are usually just that: accidents. They result from an unintentional act, and it can be difficult to determine who was actually at fault. Whether easy or difficult, if a lawsuit has been filed or a claim made with an insurance company, there will have to be a determination of which driver was at fault. If both bear some responsibility, it must be determined how much each driver was at fault.

The theory of law that pertains to car accidents is usually negligence. Negligence must be proven in almost all cases where a plaintiff has filed a lawsuit after their property has been damaged or injured in a car crash. Four elements must be proven in a negligence cause of action before a plaintiff can recover. The elements of a negligence claim are:

1. Duty: The plaintiff must establish that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty under the particular circumstances. Generally speaking, duty is easy to prove in a car accident case. A driver owes the other drivers a duty to obey traffic lights and signs, to follow the other rules of the road, and to use the care a reasonable person would use under the circumstances (for example, the driver is expected to drive slower if the weather makes driving more dangerous because the roads are wet or visibility is low).
2. Breach: The plaintiff must show that the defendant breached the duty to the plaintiff by acting or failing to act in a particular way. For example, the plaintiff could establish that the defendant did not slow down even though it was raining and the roads were very wet or that foggy conditions made it hard to see, but continued to drive at their normal speed. A driver who does not stop at a red light or yield to a driver who has the right of way has also breached their duty to the plaintiff and other drivers.
3. Causation: The plaintiff must establish that the defendant’s breach of their duty caused the plaintiff harm. For example, it may be established that the defendant’s failure to follow the traffic laws or to use reasonable care under the circumstances caused the crash that injured the plaintiff.
4. Damages: The plaintiff must show that they were injured somehow by the defendant’s actions or inaction. A driver who is driving over the speed limit and cannot stop in time might rear-end another vehicle. The plaintiff’s car may have been damaged, or the plaintiff might have suffered whiplash or some other injury and therefore incurred medical bills. In a negligence-based case known as a personal injury lawsuit, they might file to recover compensatory damages, like medical expenses and lost wages.

What is Evidence of Causation in a Car Accident Claim?

Causation is a critical element of a negligence claim. The person who caused the crash is the one at fault. Many different types of evidence can be helpful in determining fault and, therefore, liability. Some forms of evidence include:

• Photos or Videos: Since most people have cell phones with photo and video capability, it is very easy to collect photo and video evidence of the accident scene immediately after the crash. In some cases, a witness might even have video of the accident happening.
• Dashboard Camera Evidence: The use of dashboard cameras has increased in recent years, and footage from the dash cam in a car involved in an accident can be valuable. This is also true for dash cam footage from other vehicles at the scene when the crash occurred. For example, a vehicle with a dash cam might be stopped at an intersection, and the camera could record a vehicle running a red light or making an illegal turn and causing an accident.
• Police Reports: An important step after a car accident is to notify the police and make sure there is a report. The police report is often entered as evidence during the trial and provides important details from the accident scene.
• Witness Testimony: Witnesses might include bystanders, other drivers, or passengers in one or more vehicles involved in the accident.
• Traffic Laws: Accidents can happen even when everyone involved is following the law; however, traffic laws can be consulted to determine if any laws were broken that may have caused or contributed to the crash.
• Physical Evidence: Physical evidence might include damage to the vehicle(s) (particularly damage at the point of impact), paint from one vehicle on the other vehicle, skid marks on the road, or damage to road signs or other physical objects at the accident site.
• Medical Records: A person who was injured in a car accident will need to be examined by a doctor to establish any injuries that they might be able to be compensated for in a lawsuit. The medical records will illustrate the extent of any injuries and might also contain information regarding how the injuries were sustained.
• Accident Reconstruction Evidence: There is accident reconstruction technology that can simulate or “re-enact” the accident and might be able to illustrate who was at fault.

All of the above can provide important information to the judge or jury tasked with figuring out who was at fault in a car crash case.

What if the Victim is Also at Fault?

In some negligence cases, the evidence shows that the plaintiff (the victim) was also at fault. For example, if the defendant ran a red light and the plaintiff made an illegal turn, and they crashed, it can be difficult to determine who was actually at fault for the accident. Most likely, the actions of both drivers contributed to the accident.

In these types of cases, the court will apply one of the legal doctrines known as comparative negligence and contributory negligence. Whether the court uses comparative or contributory negligence will depend on the jurisdiction where the lawsuit was filed. Each state has chosen which theory will be used in their jurisdiction (although some states do not follow either theory). As a result of the doctrines of comparative and contributory negligence, when the plaintiff was also at fault, their damages claim may be reduced, or they may be unable to recover at all.

In a comparative negligence state, the amount of the plaintiff’s damages will be reduced depending on how much they were at fault. For example, if the court determines that the plaintiff was 25% responsible for the accident, the plaintiff’s $10,000 damages award will be reduced to $7,500 (i.e., reduced by 25%). This is called pure comparative negligence.

There is also a theory called “modified comparative negligence.” In that case, if the plaintiff was 50% or 51% (depending on the state), they cannot recover. Because the plaintiff caused as much of the accident or slightly more than the defendant, the plaintiff is barred from recovery. Had the plaintiff been 49% liable or less, they could recover damages, and the award would be reduced by their share of responsibility for the accident, just as above.

Contributory negligence is a less commonly used theory. There are only 5 jurisdictions that use contributory negligence: Alabama, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, and Washington D.C. This approach bars recovery if the plaintiff’s negligence contributed to the accident in any way. Therefore, if the court determines that the plaintiff was even one percent at fault for the crash, they cannot recover any damages.

Should I Hire a Lawyer for Assistance in Filing a Car Crash Claim?

If you have been involved in a car accident, you should consult a car accident lawyer. An experienced lawyer can provide valuable assistance in determining whether you have a legitimate claim for damages and what that claim might be worth.
Your lawyer will do all of the following:

• Identify the laws that apply
• Anticipate the issues that might arise during the lawsuit
• Negotiate a possible settlement with the defendant
• Represent you in court.

If you were partly at fault in the accident, having a lawyer is imperative. You could sue, or you could be sued. The laws regarding contributory and comparative negligence vary from state to state, so it is important to consult with a qualified local attorney.