Summary In recent years, courts in some states have held that when the legislature adopted
a comparative fault statute, which bases the award to the plaintiff on the defendant's percentage of responsibility for the injury to plaintiff, the legislature abolished the defense of assumption of the risk.
Prior to 2006 and the passage of F.S. 768.81, Florida's pure
comparative fault statute, injured car accident victims could seek the full amount of damages from a single defendant — even if that defendant was only partially responsible for the crash.
Not exact matches
Massachusetts has a modified
comparative negligence
statute whereby you must prove that the defendant or defendants were at least 51 % at
fault for your accident or you will not recover anything.
Texas law recognizes
comparative fault or
comparative negligence, which the
statute defines as «proportionate responsibility.»
When a Florida resident gets into a car accident, several factors can affect the insurance claims and lawsuits that might result, including Florida's status as a no -
fault state, how long drivers have to file court cases after a crash (
statute of limitations), and Florida's «pure»
comparative fault rule.
In Colorado, there is a
comparative negligence / contributory
fault statute.
It is important to note that even if you were partially at
fault for the accident, your recovery will not be barred under Maine's
comparative negligence
statute.
They will do this because Idaho uses a standard
comparative responsibility
statute, which will lower your compensation by the amount of
fault the court decides you should bear.