By Edvin Jones, Attorney at Law | Edvin Jones Injury Law | comparative negligence Nevada
Quick Takeaways
- Nevada generally follows a modified comparative negligence rule for allocating fault in personal injury cases.
- If you are 50% or less at fault, you can generally recover damages, but your compensation is reduced according to your percentage of fault.
- If you are found more than 50% at fault, Nevada law generally bars recovery.
- Insurance companies may try to assign you a higher percentage of fault to reduce the amount they have to pay.
- Evidence, witness statements, accident reconstruction, photographs, and expert testimony can be important when fault is disputed.
Comparative Negligence in Nevada: How Shared Fault Affects Your Compensation
After an accident, many injured people worry that their own actions will prevent them from receiving compensation.
Maybe you were driving slightly over the speed limit. Perhaps you were distracted for a moment, were not wearing protective equipment, or made another mistake before the accident.
Does that automatically mean you cannot recover damages?
No.
Nevada generally follows a modified comparative negligence system. This means an injured person can still recover compensation even when they share some responsibility for an accident, provided their percentage of fault does not exceed the applicable statutory threshold.
Understanding comparative negligence in Nevada is important because even a relatively small change in your percentage of fault can significantly affect the value of your claim.
How Does Comparative Negligence Work in Nevada?
Nevada’s comparative negligence statute, NRS 41.141, generally requires fault to be allocated among the parties responsible for an accident.
The amount of compensation awarded to an injured person can then be reduced according to that person’s percentage of fault.
For example, assume your total damages are $100,000:
- 20% at fault: You could recover $80,000.
- 30% at fault: You could recover $70,000.
- 50% at fault: You could recover $50,000.
- 51% at fault: You would generally be barred from recovering damages under Nevada’s modified comparative negligence rule.
The actual outcome of a case depends on the facts, evidence, applicable law, and how fault is determined.
What Is the 51% Bar Rule in Nevada?
One of the most important aspects of Nevada’s comparative negligence system is the threshold for recovery.
Generally, if an injured plaintiff is found to be more responsible for the accident than the defendant or defendants, the plaintiff cannot recover damages under NRS 41.141.
That means being found 50% at fault does not automatically eliminate your claim.
For example, if you are found 50% responsible and another party is 50% responsible, you can generally still recover 50% of your qualifying damages.
If your percentage of fault reaches 51%, however, the result can be dramatically different.
This makes disputed fault percentages especially important in Nevada personal injury cases.
Who Determines the Percentage of Fault?
The answer depends on whether the case settles or goes to trial.
In a Settlement
The parties, their attorneys, and insurance companies negotiate over liability and the percentage of fault assigned to each party.
An insurance company’s determination is not automatically the final legal determination of your fault.
At Trial
If the case goes to trial, the jury generally evaluates the evidence and determines the parties’ respective percentages of fault.
This is one reason evidence can be critical when an insurance company claims that an injured person contributed to an accident.
How Insurance Companies May Use Comparative Negligence Against You
Insurance companies have a financial incentive to minimize the amount they pay on a claim.
If an insurer can establish that you were partly responsible for the accident, your potential recovery may be reduced.
Adjusters may therefore examine:
- Statements you made after the accident
- Police reports
- Witness accounts
- Photographs and videos
- Traffic violations
- Your actions immediately before the accident
- Alleged pre-existing injuries
- Social media posts
- Medical records
For example, an insurer might argue that you were speeding, failed to pay attention, crossed improperly, or otherwise contributed to the accident.
That does not mean the insurer’s percentage-of-fault assessment is correct.
An attorney can review the evidence, challenge unsupported allegations, and develop evidence showing why the other party bears greater responsibility.
How Comparative Negligence Applies to Common Accidents
Comparative negligence can arise in many different types of personal injury claims.
Car Accidents
Imagine another driver runs a red light and hits you, but the insurer claims you were traveling slightly above the speed limit.
Both sides could potentially be assigned a percentage of fault depending on the evidence.
Slip and Fall Accidents
A property owner may argue that you contributed to your own fall by failing to watch where you were walking or wearing inappropriate footwear.
The important question is whether the evidence actually supports assigning you a percentage of legal fault.
Pedestrian Accidents
A driver may argue that a pedestrian crossed outside a designated crossing area or otherwise acted negligently.
The circumstances of the accident, applicable traffic laws, visibility, driver conduct, and other evidence can all matter.
Bicycle Accidents
A cyclist’s failure to use appropriate signals, riding behavior, or other alleged traffic violations may be raised as evidence of comparative fault.
However, simply alleging that a cyclist contributed to an accident does not establish a particular percentage of fault.
What Evidence Can Help Challenge Comparative Fault?
When fault is disputed, evidence can make a major difference.
Potentially useful evidence includes:
- Police or accident reports
- Photographs and video footage
- Traffic-camera recordings
- Surveillance footage
- Dashcam footage
- Witness statements
- Vehicle damage
- Accident reconstruction
- Medical records
- Cellphone or other relevant records
- Traffic laws and roadway evidence
- Expert testimony
The sooner evidence is preserved, the better. Surveillance footage can be overwritten, vehicles may be repaired, and witnesses may forget important details.
Does Comparative Negligence Reduce All of My Damages?
Generally, when comparative negligence applies, the percentage of fault attributed to the plaintiff can reduce the recoverable damages.
For example, if your qualifying damages total $200,000 and you are found 25% at fault, the recoverable amount could be reduced to $150,000.
The precise calculation can depend on the type of damages, parties involved, applicable statutes, and the facts of the case.
Comparative negligence is therefore not simply about proving that someone else caused the accident. It can also be about establishing how much responsibility each party legally bears.
Can Pre-Existing Injuries Affect a Comparative Negligence Claim?
An insurance company may argue that some or all of your symptoms came from a pre-existing condition rather than the accident.
That issue is different from comparative negligence, but it can affect the value and proof of a personal injury claim.
Medical records, prior treatment history, physician opinions, and evidence showing how the accident changed or aggravated your condition can become important.
An insurer’s claim that you had a pre-existing condition does not automatically mean the accident caused no compensable harm.
Why You Should Not Assume You Have No Case Because You Were Partly at Fault
Many accident victims mistakenly believe that admitting any mistake means they automatically lose their claim.
That is not how Nevada’s comparative negligence system generally works.
A person can potentially be partially responsible for an accident and still recover compensation.
The key questions include:
- What caused the accident?
- What evidence establishes each party’s conduct?
- What percentage of fault should be assigned to each party?
- What damages resulted from the accident?
- Does the applicable law allow recovery based on the final allocation of fault?
Because the difference between 50% and 51% fault can be significant under Nevada law, disputed liability should be taken seriously.
Contact Edvin Jones Injury Law
If an insurance company is claiming that you were partly responsible for your accident, do not assume that you have no right to compensation.
The percentage of fault assigned to you can have a major financial impact on your case. An attorney can investigate the accident, preserve evidence, challenge unfair fault allegations, and pursue the compensation available under Nevada law.
Free Consultation
Contact Edvin Jones Injury Law — Free Consultation
No Win, No Fee. We Speak English, Farsi, Turkish, Russian & Arabic.
Address: 818 E Charleston Blvd, Las Vegas, NV 89104
Phone: 702-337-3430
Website: edvin.law
Instagram: edvinjonesinjurylaw | TikTok: edvin.law
Licensed in Nevada | Arizona | California
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Who decides how much fault I bear in a Nevada personal injury case?
In a settlement, the parties and their attorneys or insurers negotiate liability and potential fault allocations.
If the case proceeds to trial, the jury generally determines the parties’ percentages of fault based on the evidence presented.
An insurance company’s initial assessment of your fault is not necessarily the final determination.
2. Can comparative negligence apply even if the other party clearly caused the accident?
Yes. A defendant or insurance company may still argue that you contributed to the accident.
Whether that argument is supported by the evidence is a separate question. Your attorney can challenge an unsupported or exaggerated fault allegation using photographs, witnesses, accident reconstruction, records, and other evidence.
3. What happens if I am 50% at fault in Nevada?
Generally, Nevada’s modified comparative negligence rule allows recovery when your percentage of fault does not exceed 50%, although your damages are reduced according to your percentage of fault.
For example, if you have $100,000 in qualifying damages and are found 50% at fault, your recovery could be reduced to $50,000.
4. What happens if I am 51% at fault?
Under Nevada’s modified comparative negligence framework, a plaintiff who is found more than 50% responsible for the accident is generally barred from recovering damages from the other party.
Because the difference between 50% and 51% can have a major effect on a claim, evidence concerning fault can be extremely important.
5. Does Nevada’s comparative negligence rule apply to every personal injury case?
Comparative negligence can apply to many Nevada personal injury claims, including automobile accidents, premises liability cases, bicycle accidents, pedestrian accidents, and product liability claims.
However, the precise rules and exceptions can depend on the type of claim and the conduct involved. Claims involving intentional wrongdoing or other specialized circumstances may be treated differently.
