Table of content
Target Keywords: comparative negligence, motorcycle accident, auto accident law, fault and liability
Regions: California · Arizona · Nevada
Slogan: “Always Riding by Your Side.”
After a motorcycle or auto accident, one of the most common questions clients ask is, “What if I was partly at fault?” The answer depends on a legal concept called comparative negligence. Understanding this principle can make a major difference in the outcome of your case—and the amount of compensation you receive.
“Comparative negligence isn’t about assigning blame—it’s about understanding how responsibility is shared,” explains Robert Vetchtein, founder of Shark Law Motorcycle / Auto Attorneys. “Even if you were partially at fault, you still have rights.”
What Is Comparative Negligence?
Comparative negligence is a legal system used to determine compensation in cases where both parties share responsibility for an accident. Instead of completely denying recovery to anyone who contributed to the crash, comparative negligence adjusts compensation based on each party’s percentage of fault.
Example:
If you’re awarded $100,000 but found 20% at fault for a motorcycle crash, your recovery would be reduced by 20%, leaving you with $80,000.
How It Works Across States
- California: Uses “pure comparative negligence.” You can recover damages even if you’re 99% at fault—though your compensation is reduced accordingly.
- Arizona: Also follows pure comparative negligence, meaning partial fault doesn’t prevent recovery.
- Nevada: Uses “modified comparative negligence.” You can recover compensation only if you’re less than 51% at fault.
Why Comparative Negligence Matters for Motorcycle Riders
Motorcyclists often face bias after an accident. Insurance companies and opposing lawyers may claim you were speeding, weaving, or not visible enough—tactics designed to increase your percentage of fault and decrease your payout.
Having an experienced motorcycle accident attorney is crucial. At Shark Law, we investigate every detail—from road conditions to driver behavior—to ensure blame is properly placed and riders aren’t unfairly targeted.
“Comparative negligence can work against riders who don’t have strong legal representation,” says Vetchtein. “Our team ensures the facts—not assumptions—determine fault.”
Proving Your Case Under Comparative Negligence
To minimize your share of fault and maximize recovery, your attorney must build a solid case using:
- Police reports and accident reconstructions
- Witness statements and camera footage
- Expert medical and mechanical evaluations
- Evidence of driver distraction, intoxication, or negligence
Common Scenarios That Involve Shared Fault
- Lane-splitting accidents: Legal in California, but insurers may still attempt to assign partial blame.
- Unsafe turns: A car turning left in front of a motorcyclist may share fault if the rider was traveling slightly over the speed limit.
- Rear-end collisions: Even if you braked suddenly, the driver behind you typically holds the majority of liability.
How Shark Law Protects Your Rights
We know that comparative negligence is a strategy insurance companies use to reduce your claim. Our job is to challenge those narratives, establish the truth, and fight for the compensation you’re entitled to.
Whether your accident happened in California, Arizona, or Nevada, our multi-state legal expertise ensures that your case is handled under the most favorable laws available.
Final Thoughts: You Still Deserve Justice
Even if you believe you were partly at fault in your motorcycle or auto accident, don’t assume you have no case. Comparative negligence allows you to pursue compensation for your injuries, damages, and losses—just adjusted to reflect your true level of responsibility.
Contact Shark Law Motorcycle / Auto Attorneys today for a free consultation.
We’ll explain your rights clearly, assess your case honestly, and stand by your side every mile of the way.
