After an accident, it is not always easy to determine who was responsible. Maybe another driver made an unsafe turn, but you were also traveling above the speed limit. Perhaps you slipped and fell on someone else’s property, but the property owner claims you were not paying attention. When more than one person may have contributed to an accident, questions about fault can become complicated.
So, can you still recover compensation if you were partially at fault for an accident in Arizona?
Yes, you may still be able to recover compensation. Arizona follows a comparative negligence system, which means an injured person’s share of fault generally reduces the damages they may recover rather than automatically preventing recovery. The specific circumstances of the accident, the evidence, and the applicable law all play a role in determining the outcome.
Understanding how Arizona’s comparative negligence laws work can help clarify what happens when responsibility for an accident is shared.
What Is Comparative Negligence in Arizona?
Comparative negligence is a legal principle that addresses situations in which an injured person and another party both contributed to an accident or injury.
Under Arizona Revised Statutes § 12-2505, a claimant’s contributory negligence does not automatically bar a negligence claim. Instead, when the statute applies, damages are reduced in proportion to the claimant’s relative degree of fault that was a proximate cause of the injury or death.
In simple terms, you do not necessarily have to be completely free of fault to recover compensation in Arizona. Your share of responsibility can affect the amount of damages available.
For example, imagine someone is injured in a car accident and has $100,000 in damages. If that person is determined to be 20% at fault, a proportional reduction of 20% would leave $80,000.
This example illustrates how comparative negligence works mathematically. Actual claims involve individual circumstances, and the amount of damages and percentage of fault must be established under the applicable law.
How Does Partial Fault Affect an Injury Claim?
The percentage of fault assigned to an injured person can make a difference in a personal injury claim. Arizona’s comparative negligence framework generally reduces damages according to the claimant’s relative degree of fault.
Consider a few hypothetical examples:
- 10% at fault: If the damages are $100,000, a 10% reduction would leave $90,000.
- 30% at fault: The same damages would be reduced to $70,000.
- 50% at fault: The remaining amount would be $50,000.
- 75% at fault: A 75% reduction would leave $25,000.
These figures are illustrations, not estimates of what someone would receive in an actual case.
Unlike states that use a modified comparative negligence rule with a cutoff based on the injured person’s percentage of fault, Arizona generally does not bar recovery simply because a claimant is more than 50% at fault. Other legal requirements and exceptions may still affect whether recovery is possible.
Can More Than One Person Be Responsible for an Accident?
Yes. Arizona law recognizes that multiple people may contribute to the same accident or injury.
Under A.R.S. § 12-2506, fault may be apportioned among the claimant, defendants, and certain nonparties whose conduct contributed to the injury or damage. Specific statutory and procedural requirements apply when a party seeks to have a nonparty’s fault considered.
For example, imagine a collision in which one driver was speeding while another driver made an unsafe lane change. Depending on the evidence, both drivers may be found to have contributed to the collision.
Arizona law generally allocates damages among defendants according to their respective percentages of fault, subject to statutory exceptions. This means the question is not always simply which person caused the accident. It may also involve how responsibility is divided among the people whose conduct contributed to the harm.
How Is Fault Determined After an Accident?
Determining fault often requires looking beyond the initial description of what happened. The people involved may remember events differently, and the available evidence may provide additional details about how an accident occurred.
Depending on the circumstances, relevant evidence may include:
- Police reports and incident reports
- Photographs or video recordings
- Witness statements
- Medical records documenting injuries
- Vehicle or property damage evidence
- Accident reconstruction findings
- Other records relevant to the events leading up to the accident
For example, a driver may believe another motorist caused a collision, while the other motorist claims the first driver contributed to it. An insurance company’s initial assessment may not resolve every disagreement about responsibility.
In a lawsuit, the trier of fact determines the relevant factual issues under the applicable legal rules. This may be a jury or a judge, depending on the proceeding.
The percentage of fault is not necessarily established by an accusation alone. The circumstances, supporting evidence, and applicable law all matter.
Does Comparative Negligence Apply to Different Types of Accidents?
Comparative negligence can be relevant to several types of personal injury claims in Arizona. How it applies depends on the circumstances and the legal issues involved.
Car and Motorcycle Accidents
After a motor vehicle accident, more than one driver may have contributed to the collision. One driver may have been speeding, while another failed to yield or made an unsafe maneuver. Evidence may help establish how each person’s conduct contributed to the accident.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Accidents
Questions about fault can also arise when a pedestrian or cyclist is injured. For example, a driver may be accused of failing to yield, while the circumstances may also raise questions about the pedestrian’s or cyclist’s conduct. The applicable law and evidence determine how these issues are evaluated.
Slip and Fall Accidents
In a premises liability claim, questions may arise about the condition of a property, whether a responsible party acted negligently, and whether the injured person’s conduct contributed to the fall. The property owner’s potential responsibility and the injured person’s actions must be evaluated in light of the specific circumstances.
In each situation, comparative negligence is one part of the analysis. A claimant must still establish the applicable legal requirements for the underlying claim.
Are There Exceptions to Arizona’s Comparative Negligence Rules?
Although Arizona generally allows damages to be reduced according to a claimant’s degree of fault, the law includes important qualifications.
For example, A.R.S. § 12-2505 provides that there is no right to comparative negligence in favor of a claimant who intentionally, willfully, or wantonly caused or contributed to the injury or wrongful death.
Arizona law also establishes rules for allocating fault among defendants and certain nonparties. Under A.R.S. § 12-2506, defendants are generally responsible for the damages allocated to them according to their percentages of fault, although statutory exceptions exist.
These distinctions matter because comparative negligence does not guarantee recovery in every case. The type of claim, the conduct involved, and the evidence can all affect the legal analysis.
Is There a Deadline to File an Arizona Personal Injury Claim?
Yes. Arizona law sets deadlines for filing different types of legal claims.
Under A.R.S. § 12-542, many actions involving personal injury generally must be filed within two years after the cause of action accrues. However, the applicable deadline depends on the type of claim and the circumstances. Exceptions and other legal provisions may apply.
Understanding comparative negligence is only one part of understanding an injury claim. Filing deadlines and other legal requirements can also affect whether a claim may proceed.
Understanding Partial Fault After an Arizona Accident
Under Arizona law, being partially at fault does not automatically prevent an injured person from recovering compensation. Arizona follows a comparative negligence system, which generally means that an injured person’s damages may be reduced according to their share of fault. In other words, a person may still be able to recover compensation even if their own actions contributed to the accident.
The important question is not always whether someone contributed to an accident, but how the law applies to the circumstances and evidence. Understanding comparative negligence can help explain why responsibility may be shared and why the details of an accident matter.
How Fielding Law Can Help
At Fielding Law, we understand that accidents do not always involve straightforward questions of responsibility. When an injured person may share some of the fault, understanding Arizona’s comparative negligence laws can be an important part of evaluating the circumstances.
Our personal injury team represents clients in Arizona and California. We take the time to understand each client’s situation, review the available information, and explain the legal process so clients can make informed decisions about their options.
Every situation is different, and no particular outcome can be guaranteed. If you have questions about an Arizona personal injury matter, Fielding Law offers free consultations with no obligation. Our team is available 24/7 at 833.88.SHARK.
Fielding Law, APC – Irvine, CA Office
505 Technology Dr Ste 250
Irvine, CA 92618
(949) 288-5484
Fielding Law, APC – Phoenix, AZ Office
2 N Central Ave Ste 1800
Phoenix, AZ 85004
(859) 578-4444
Note: Information provided is for educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Always consult with a qualified attorney for legal concerns.[/vc_column_text]BLOG HOME[/vc_column][/vc_row]
