Comparative negligence is a term used by automobile insurance companies when determining who is at fault for a traffic accident. It means that depending on how the accident occurred, both drivers involved may be assigned some degree of fault for the event.
With comparative negligence, one person involved seeks compensation. That alone distinguishes it from contributory negligence, which does the opposite, preventing the plaintiff from receiving damages.
Colorado is a modified comparative negligence state. When an automobile crash occurs here, the insurance company will review the details to determine the extent to which each driver might have caused the accident. In other words, one driver might not be entirely to blame, so the liability will be shared between both people accordingly.
If you were involved in a traffic accident and are requesting to be reimbursed by your own insurance company, comparative negligence does not apply in this instance. In this case, you can be reimbursed by your insurance company even you are found to be the primary cause of the accident. However, if you seek damages from the other driver(s), then their insurance companies will investigate for comparative negligence before you are eligible to receive any money.
Because of the comparative negligence laws, you should talk to a Colorado car accident attorney about your options following a traffic accident. If you have been in a traffic accident in Colorado, call Bell & Pollock P.C. at (720) 613-6736.
Frequently Asked Questions About Negligence
What is the modified comparative negligence law in Colorado?
Colorado state law uses 50% modified comparative negligence. That means that if a driver is over 50% at fault for an accident, they give up their right to receive compensation for damages. Other states throughout the country have similar regulations in place regarding traffic accidents. However, state laws differ regarding how much fault drivers can have in traffic accidents and still collect damages.
There are no set guidelines in Colorado for concluding which party is at fault for a car collision. Instead, fault is determined on an accident-by-accident basis by a car insurance adjuster. The adjuster must consider many different factors, including local traffic laws and road conditions at the time of the crash.
How is this law enforced?
The modified comparative negligence law calls for insurance companies to make the final decision regarding who is at fault in an accident. There are many reasons that a driver could assume at least some portion of the responsibility, even if the other driver is mainly at fault.
Common reasons for any involved party to be at fault for an accident include failure to follow the rules of the road and using a cell phone or being otherwise distracted while driving. Additionally, if a driver did not cause the accident but could have done something to prevent it, they may be assigned some portion of the liability.
For example, a driver who is granted the right of way at a green traffic light might still be considered at fault to some degree if they were speeding through an intersection and hit a car that was turning. The driver making the turn, though at fault for not yielding to the driver with the right of way, may only be found 75% liable for the accident.
The driver with the right-of-way was speeding and unable to stop in time to prevent the collision. Therefore, that driver is held 25% responsible for the accident. If the driver with the right-of-way were to sue the other driver for damages, they would only receive the full amount awarded in the case, as the driver making the turn is over 50% at fault.
How does the insurance company come to a decision about liability in car accidents?
Insurance company employees will carefully review the details of accidents. A thorough review of an accident will likely include investigating the scene of the accident, collecting statements from witnesses and involved parties, reviewing police reports, noting local traffic laws (including speed limits), and considering whether the condition or layout of the roadway played a role in the collision. Then, the insurance adjusters will determine what percentage of liability—if any—to assign to each driver involved in the crash.
If I am found to be mainly at fault, can I still collect damages from the other driver?
No. If you are primarily at fault in a car accident, you are unable to collect any money from the insurance company of the other driver who was involved in the accident. However, even if you are at fault, you are still able to collect money from your own insurance company to cover the costs of repairing your car. In this instance, comparative negligence does not apply to you.
Can I dispute the determination of the insurance company?
If you feel you have been unfairly named liable in a car accident, it is within your rights to file an internal appeal with the adjuster and insurance company. When you appeal, the insurance company will launch a full investigation that may result in a revised determination of liability if there is enough evidence to prove otherwise. If you feel the other driver is more at fault than you are, schedule a consultation to talk to a Colorado car accident attorney for legal assistance.
What if my appeal is denied?
It can be difficult for a court of law to determine which party should be held liable for a car accident. A final decision will involve determining the accuracy of your statement about the accident and the moments leading up to it, as well as other factors surrounding the accident, including the actions of other drivers. If you feel that you are still unfairly blamed for a traffic accident, you should make an appointment with the County Court Clerk to explore your options.
Even minor car accidents can be stressful for the parties involved. Regardless of whether you are at fault or the other party is to blame, it helps to know you have a competent Colorado car accident attorney to help you understand state laws regarding comparative negligence. Call (720) 613-6736 to talk to one of the experienced car accident attorneys at Bell & Pollock P.C. for the help you need following a car accident in Colorado.
Contact Us
Call a trusted attorney at Bell & Pollock, P.C. at (303) 795-5900 to get on the road to recovery now. You can also email our firm via the contact firm on this page.
As proud champions of the people, our lawyers are ready to answer your questions, explain the law and your rights, and help you take whatever steps necessary to recover the compensation you’re entitled to. With us in your corner, you can be confident that you have the legal support and representation necessary to successfully resolve your claim.
Don’t delay your recovery for a second longer – and don’t be misguided into thinking that you have to go through the process alone. Our attorneys are here, ready to help – and you won’t have to pay us anything until (or unless) there is a recovery in your case.
Free Legal E-Books
Click on any one of the e-books to access your free copy!
Case Results
WE KNOW HOW TO WIN
CASE: Client was injured by a drunk driver. As a result of the motor vehicle accident, client was rendered a quadriplegic and needed a life care plan.
Outcome: $9,600,000
CASE: Against Insurance company for failure to pay for property damage after a gas and fire explosion.
Outcome: $1,600,000
CASE: Medical malpractice for failure to diagnose a descending aorta aneurism, resulting in death.
Outcome: $1,300,000
CASE: Neck and back injuries from car accident. Client had ongoing symptoms and needed injections for attempted remediation of pain.
Settled for $485,000
CASE: Client was injured in a 2 vehicle collision. She suffered a traumatic brain injury, concussion and multiple injuries to the neck.
Outcome: $6,000,000
CASE: Client was in her car and was T-Boned by a commercial vehicle. Her cerebral spinal fluid leaked and she suffered a concussion and traumatic brain injury with neck and lumbar (low back) injuries. Her neck injury caused radiating pain, numbness and tingling in her arms.
Outcome: $3,400,000
CASE: Client was driving on a rural road when another car crossed the center line and caused a head-on collision in the snow and ice. Client did physical work for a living. Both knees were injured, along with a neck injury.
Outcome: $2,300,000
CASE: Client was driving on South Parker road when another vehicle rapidly changed lanes and rear-ended the client. That vehicle was cited for careless driving. The collision caused a concussion with traumatic brain Injury. Client missed time from work and had a positive correlation between brain scan and neuropsychological test results.
Outcome: $950,000
CASE: Client was rear ended by a dump truck, was then knocked forward and hit another vehicle. Client had a concussion with traumatic brain injury. Client underwent a brain scan which showed hypoperfusion, correlated with her concussion symptoms. Client suffered neck injuries and injuries to her low back.
Outcome: $650,000
CASE: Client was rear-ended. The mechanism of injury from the forces in the collision caused her neck injury and at the same time, damaged her organs inside her throat. Client had swallowing and choking issues.
Outcome: $1,250,000
CASE: Client was in a motor vehicle accident. Both injections in the neck rendered some temporary relief. The Injections were transforaminal epidural steroid injections. Surgery was recommended on the lumbar (low back). The low back was injured by the forces in the collisions.
Outcome: $933,000
CASE: The client was driving in her car and was rear-ended thereby causing injuries to her lower back and neck. Client also suffered a concussion. Client had to undergo facet injections multiple times, through multiple procedures. Client also had cognitive issues which required cognitive training and therapy.
Outcome: $400,000
CASE: Client was entering a highway from an on ramp and was rear-ended by a commercial van. Client tested positive for Thoracic Outlet Syndrome and failed conservative treatment. Client underwent thoracic outlet syndrome surgey, which involved removal of the first rib to attempt to relieve pressure in the thoracic outlet. Client also suffered a back injury.
Outcome: $750,000
CASE: Client was injured by a drunk driver, who crossed the center line of the road. Client underwent multiple surgeries and could not work. Client was late 40s and needed a modified life care plan.
Outcome: $750,000
CASE: Client was rear ended by a tow truck driver who was a diabetic. The diabetic at fault party was a non-compliant diabetic and claimed he had a syncope episode, and was “blacked out”. Client had a preexisting back condition known and the forces from the collision aggravated, or made worse, the preexisting back condition in addition to, causing neck injuries.
Outcome: $350,000
CASE: Client was a passenger in a car where the driver fell asleep on a country road in the early morning hours. The car rolled multiple times. Client had eye injuries, facial injuries and neck and knee injuries.
Outcome: $850,000
CASE: Client was on the job, driving her own car, when she was rear-ended. She suffered a concussion with traumatic brain injury and pursued Workers Compensation Claim.
Outcome: $150,000
CASE: Client slipped and fell on snow and ice in Central City. He suffered back injuries, that did not require injections.
Outcome: $125,000
CASE: Client slipped and fell on snow and ice on a sidewalk in front of a business. She had to have knee surgery and multiple injections in her back.
Outcome: $175,000
CASE: Client was visiting a friend who was renting a house. Client tripped on untreated, dangerous section of deck and injured his back.
Outcome: $150,000
CASE:Client was rear ended and needed fusion spinal surgery. Insurance proceeds were limited.
Outcome: $125,000
CASE:Client was rear-ended and had to have rotator cuff surgery. Insurance proceeds were limited.
Settled for $65,000
CASE:Client was at Denver International Aiport traveling through Denver, slipped and fell and broke her ankle.
Settled for $118,750
CASE:Client was exposed to mold in a multi-family dwelling that was caused by leaking water.
Settled for $125,000
CASE:Motorcycle accident, reconstructive surgery, post-traumatic stress disorder, neurological injuries
Settled for $1,275,000
Testimonials
CLIENTS APPRECIATE US
I could not have made a better decision than to call Bell & Pollock with my case. Dana Miller and her team were the best.
THEY WERE VERY PROFESSIONAL, KEPT ME INFORMED AND DID WHAT I WOULD CALL A SPECTACULAR JOB- THEY SEEM TO PREACH "LEGAL GAME PLAN" AND EVEN WROTE A BOOK ABOUT IT- IT BASICALLY MEANS THEY HAVE STRATEGIES FOR YOU AND YOUR CASE AND I MEAN EVERYTHING WAS SOUND AND ANALYZED.
I appreciate brad and his team the bell and Pollock attorneys are by far the best ones i have ever worked with.
Brad Pollock is educated, experienced, and is the world's greatest attorney. Marlena Elsloo helps him focus in on the most important issues.
He is very professional and we would recommend Mr. Bell to anyone who is looking for an attorney.
He was kind, compassionate and knowledgeable, but also tenacious when working with the insurance companies.
I was blessed to be put in contact with Dana, who not only provided me free feedback and counsel when we spoke on the phone, but also took the time to call me back on multiple occasions to check on me.Dana Miller, you are a sweet, caring and amazing person and I appreciate all your help.