What Is Comparative Negligence and How Does It Impact Your Claim in Washington?

Who’s at fault in an accident?  Sometimes it’s hard to tell.  Contact Abeyta Nelson for help.

When you’re involved in an accident, determining fault isn’t always straightforward. If you’re filing a personal injury claim in Yakima, Washington, understanding the principle of comparative negligence can be key to maximizing your compensation. Let’s break it down.

What Is Comparative Negligence?

Comparative negligence is a legal principle used to assign fault in situations where multiple parties share responsibility for an accident. It allows for compensation based on each party’s degree of fault. For instance, if you were partially at fault for a car accident, your compensation would be reduced proportionally to your share of responsibility.

How Comparative Negligence Works in Washington

In Washington State, the principle of comparative negligence is employed to determine fault and financial responsibility in personal injury cases. This system assesses each party’s contribution to an accident and adjusts compensation based on their respective levels of fault. Unlike contributory negligence, which can bar recovery if the injured party is even minimally at fault, comparative negligence allows for partial recovery proportional to the degree of fault assigned to each party.

Legal Framework

The state’s comparative negligence law is codified in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 4.22.005, which formally adopts the pure comparative negligence system. Implemented in 1973, this statute marked a shift from the contributory negligence system, aligning with a broader trend toward more equitable evaluations of shared responsibility in accidents.

Application in Personal Injury Cases

In practice, the pure comparative negligence system operates as follows:

• Scenario: A pedestrian crosses the street outside of a designated crosswalk and is struck by a speeding vehicle.
• Fault Assessment: The court determines that the pedestrian is 30% at fault for jaywalking, while the driver is 70% at fault for speeding.
• Compensation: If the total damages amount to $100,000, the pedestrian would be entitled to recover $70,000, reflecting a 30% reduction corresponding to their share of fault.

This proportional allocation ensures that each party bears financial responsibility commensurate with their contribution to the accident.

Strategic Considerations

Given that compensation is directly influenced by the assigned percentages of fault, insurance companies may attempt to attribute a higher degree of responsibility to the injured party to minimize payouts. Therefore, it is crucial for claimants to work with experienced personal injury attorneys who can advocate effectively, gather compelling evidence, and negotiate to ensure a fair assessment of fault and appropriate compensation.

Understanding Washington’s comparative negligence law is essential for anyone involved in a personal injury case, as it directly impacts the potential recovery and underscores the importance of establishing an accurate distribution of fault among all parties involved.

Proving Negligence in Your Claim

To successfully recover compensation under Washington’s comparative negligence laws, your attorney must prove the following elements:

1. Duty of Care: The other party owed you a responsibility to act reasonably—for example, following traffic laws.
2. Breach of Duty: The other party failed to meet this standard by acting negligently.
3. Causation: The breach of duty directly caused your injuries.
4. Damages: You suffered measurable losses such as medical expenses, lost wages, or pain and suffering.

Why Comparative Negligence Matters

The principle of comparative negligence ensures that fault is assigned fairly, but it also means that every percentage point matters in your claim. Insurance companies often use this rule to minimize payouts, arguing that you share more fault than is accurate. This is why having an experienced attorney by your side is crucial to challenging such claims and ensuring a fair outcome.

Common Scenarios Involving Comparative Negligence

Here are some examples of how comparative negligence might apply:

• Car Accidents: You rear-end another vehicle but argue that the other driver’s brake lights were not working.
• Slip and Falls: You slip on a wet floor at a store but are found partially at fault for not noticing a caution sign.
• Pedestrian Accidents: You are hit while jaywalking, but the driver was speeding.

In these scenarios, your compensation will be adjusted based on your level of fault.

Comparative Negligence vs. Contributory Negligence

To reiterate, Washington follows a pure comparative negligence model, meaning each party involved in an accident is assigned a percentage of fault, and compensation is adjusted based on that percentage. Even if a plaintiff is predominantly at fault, they can still recover a portion of damages proportional to the other party’s degree of fault.

• Example: If a plaintiff is 80% responsible for an accident and their total damages are $10,000, they can still recover 20% of their damages, or $2,000.
• Legal Basis: This system is codified under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 4.22.005, implemented in 1973 to provide a more equitable evaluation of shared responsibility.
• Key Features:
  • Encourages fair compensation even in complex cases where multiple parties share fault.
  • Reduces the plaintiff’s recovery by their percentage of fault.
  • Insurance companies and courts evaluate and allocate fault percentages.

In contrast, contributory negligence is a much stricter legal standard. Under this rule, if a plaintiff is found even 1% at fault for an accident, they are barred from recovering any damages. Washington does not follow this rule, but it is used in states like Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina.

How Abeyta Nelson Can Help

At Abeyta Nelson Injury Law, we’ve helped Yakima residents navigate the complexities of personal injury law for decades. Our attorneys excel at gathering evidence, negotiating with insurance companies, and presenting compelling cases to minimize your assigned fault and maximize your compensation.

Contact us today.