If you have been injured in an accident in Idaho, one of the most important legal concepts you need to understand is comparative fault. Idaho's comparative fault law directly affects how much compensation you can recover, and in some cases, whether you can recover anything at all.
What Is Comparative Fault?
Comparative fault (also called comparative negligence) is a legal principle that allocates responsibility for an accident between the parties involved. Idaho follows a "modified comparative fault" system under Idaho Code § 6-801.
Under this system, your compensation is reduced by your percentage of fault, and you are barred from recovery if your fault is 50% or greater.
How Does the 50% Rule Work?
Here is a practical example:
You are involved in a car accident at the intersection of Eagle Road and Ustick Road in Meridian. The other driver ran a red light, but you were driving 5 mph over the speed limit. The jury determines that the other driver was 80% at fault and you were 20% at fault.
If your total damages are $100,000, your recovery would be reduced by 20%: you would receive $80,000.
But if the jury determined you were 50% or more at fault, you would receive nothing.
How Insurance Companies Use Comparative Fault Against You
Insurance adjusters are trained to find any reason to attribute fault to you. Common tactics include claiming you were distracted or on your phone, arguing you were speeding even slightly, suggesting you failed to take evasive action, using your own statements against you, pointing to lack of seat belt use, and reviewing your social media for inconsistencies.
This is why it is critical to avoid giving recorded statements to insurance companies and to hire an attorney who can protect you from these tactics.
Comparative Fault in Different Types of Cases
Car Accidents Comparative fault is frequently raised in intersection accidents, rear-end collisions, and multi-vehicle crashes. Even minor traffic violations can be used to attribute fault to you.
Motorcycle Accidents Insurance companies often apply bias against motorcyclists. They may argue the rider was speeding, lane splitting, or not wearing a helmet to reduce compensation.
Pedestrian Accidents If you were jaywalking or crossing against a signal, the defense will argue comparative fault. However, drivers always have a duty to exercise care to avoid pedestrians.
Slip and Fall Property owners frequently argue that the injured person was not watching where they were walking, was wearing inappropriate footwear, or ignored warning signs.
How Our Attorneys Minimize Your Fault
At Meridian Injury Lawyers, we use several strategies to minimize fault attributed to our clients. We gather evidence proving the other party's negligence, work with accident reconstruction experts to demonstrate what actually happened, obtain surveillance footage and witness testimony, challenge the insurance company's fault assessment, and present your case in the strongest possible light.
Our goal is to prove that the other party bore the majority of responsibility for the accident, maximizing your compensation under Idaho's comparative fault law.
The Bottom Line
Even if you believe you may have been partially at fault for your accident, do not assume you have no case. Many accident victims are surprised to learn that they can still recover significant compensation. Contact Meridian Injury Lawyers at (208) 555-0100 for a free consultation. We will evaluate the facts of your case and give you an honest assessment of your options.
All guides