Anyone who brings a personal injury lawsuit forth in a Texas civil court must prove the defendant’s negligence caused an injury or property loss. Automobile accident victims may seek substantial compensation for injuries suffered, and drivers whose reckless actions lead to harm could find it difficult to defend their actions. However, the defense might suggest comparative fault exists, a legal issue that addresses partial negligence.
Comparative negligence explained
With comparative negligence, also known as comparative fault, each driver in a car accident may commit actions that point blame to both. However, the blame might not be equal. For example, someone may slow down, pause at a stop sign, head into the intersection, and get hit by another car. Pausing is a moving violation since the driver did not come to a complete stop. Still, the other driver could be more liable for the accident if the person was under the influence, speeding, and traveling through the stop sign at a high rate of speed.
A court of law may determine the speeding driver was 80% at fault for the collision. Therefore, the victims hit by the reckless driver may receive an award of up to 80% of their losses.
Proving fault
Both sides may claim the other was disproportionally at fault. Proving negligence after car accidents involves presenting the necessary proof for a civil judgment or an insurance claim. Witnesses, post-accident photographs and videos, and police reports could serve as evidence that points to who was at fault. The evidence may help establish an appropriate comparative negligence ratio for the parties involved.
Insurance companies could challenge claims of negligence, and strong evidence may refute these providers. Solid evidence might lead to a far more equitable and fair settlement.