How Tennessee’s Comparative Fault Rule Affects Your Personal Injury Compensation
Tennessee’s personal injury laws are designed to ensure fairness and accountability for all parties involved in an accident. One of the most significant legal principles affecting personal injury claims in Tennessee is the comparative fault rule.
This rule determines how fault is allocated among the parties and directly impacts the amount of compensation an injured party can recover, particularly when they are partially at fault.
What Is Tennessee’s Comparative Fault Rule?
Tennessee follows a modified comparative negligence system, as codified in Tennessee Code Annotated § 29-11-103. Under this system, an injured party can recover damages as long as they are not more than 50% at fault for the accident. However, if the injured party’s fault exceeds 50%, they are barred from recovering any compensation.
For claimants who are 50% or less at fault, their compensation is reduced by their percentage of fault. This system ensures that liability is distributed equitably, holding each party accountable for their degree of responsibility.
How Fault Is Determined
Determining fault in a personal injury case requires a careful evaluation of the facts, evidence, and circumstances surrounding the accident. Various factors can influence the determination of fault. Eyewitness accounts often play a critical role by providing firsthand descriptions of the events leading up to the accident. Police reports can carry significant weight when dealing directly with the insurance company prior to filing suit. If the case goes to trial, then the police report is inadmissible in Tennessee, and the investigating officer will need to be called as a witness at trial.
Surveillance footage, if available, can provide a clear and objective view of what occurred, often filling gaps in witness testimony or conflicting accounts. In more complex cases, accident reconstruction analyses are employed, using scientific methods to recreate the events and establish contributing factors. Additional expert witnesses may offer testimony to clarify technical aspects or provide context for the evidence.
Once all available evidence is thoroughly reviewed, an insurance adjuster will give their opinion on fault. If you disagree with the insurance adjuster, you have the option to file suit, and a judge or jury will assign a percentage of fault to each party involved. This determination is critical, as it directly impacts how liability is distributed and compensation is calculated in accordance with Tennessee’s comparative fault rules.
Examples of Comparative Fault in Action
The comparative fault rule applies in a variety of personal injury cases, including car accidents, slip-and-fall incidents, and product liability claims. Here are a few examples to illustrate how this rule affects compensation:
Example 1: A Car Accident
Two drivers, Alice and Bob, are involved in a car accident. Alice sustains injuries and files a claim against Bob, alleging that he ran a red light and caused the collision. However, during the investigation, evidence reveals that Alice was speeding at the time of the crash, contributing to the severity of the incident.
When the case goes to trial, the jury evaluates the evidence and determines that Bob bears the majority of the responsibility, assigning him 70% of the fault for running the red light. At the same time, the jury concludes that Alice is 30% at fault due to her speeding, which played a role in the accident.
Based on these findings, the jury awards Alice $100,000 in damages for her injuries and losses. However, under Tennessee’s comparative fault rule, her compensation is reduced by 30% to account for her share of the fault. As a result, Alice receives $70,000 in damages after the reduction, reflecting the proportional responsibility assigned to each party.
Example 2: A Slip-and-Fall Case
John slips and falls on a wet floor while shopping in a grocery store. The store had neglected to place any warning signs about the hazardous condition, creating an unsafe environment for customers. However, evidence also reveals that John was looking at his phone at the time of the fall, which contributed to his lack of awareness and failure to avoid the hazard.
When the case goes before a jury, they determine that the store bears the majority of the responsibility for the accident, assigning it 80% of the fault for failing to warn customers of the danger. At the same time, the jury concludes that John holds 20% of the fault for not paying attention to his surroundings.
As a result, the jury awards John $50,000 in damages to cover his medical expenses and other losses. However, under Tennessee’s comparative fault rule, his compensation is reduced by 20% to reflect his share of the fault. This adjustment leaves John with a final award of $40,000, balancing accountability between both parties involved in the incident.
Impact of Being More Than 50% at Fault
Under Tennessee’s modified comparative fault rule, the consequences of being more than 50% at fault are severe. In such cases, the injured party is barred from recovering any compensation, even if the other party was partially responsible for the accident.
Example: A Pedestrian Accident
Sarah, a pedestrian, attempts to cross a dark street at night but chooses to do so outside of a marked crosswalk. While crossing, she is struck by a car driven by Tom, who was traveling 10 miles over the speed limit at the time of the accident. Both Sarah’s decision to jaywalk in the dark and Tom’s excessive speed contribute to the accident.
When the case is presented to a jury, they evaluate the circumstances and assign 60% of the fault to Sarah for jaywalking at night time and disregarding pedestrian safety rules. Tom, for his part in speeding, is assigned 40% of the fault.
Under Tennessee’s modified comparative fault rule, Sarah’s degree of fault has a critical impact on her ability to recover damages. Because her fault exceeds 50%, she is barred from receiving any compensation for her injuries, regardless of Tom’s share of responsibility. This outcome underscores the strict application of Tennessee’s fault allocation system in personal injury cases.
This strict cutoff highlights the importance of proving that the other party bears the majority of the fault in a personal injury claim.
Strategies for Managing Comparative Fault in Tennessee
Because the comparative fault rule can significantly impact recovery, it is essential to build a strong case to minimize your assigned fault and maximize your compensation. Here are some strategies:
Gather Strong Evidence
Collect as much evidence as possible, such as photos of the accident scene, medical records, and witness statements. Evidence that clearly shows the other party’s negligence can help reduce your fault percentage.
Work with Expert Witnesses
Expert witnesses, such as accident reconstruction specialists, can provide credible testimony to support your case and refute claims that you were partially at fault.
Challenge Fault Assignments
If the other party or their insurer assigns you an unfair percentage of fault, challenge it by presenting counter-evidence and arguing for a more accurate assessment of liability.
Hire an Experienced Knoxville Personal Injury Attorney
A knowledgeable attorney can negotiate with insurance companies and advocate for your interests in court, ensuring that your fault is not overstated.
Comparative Fault in Insurance Claims
Comparative fault does not only apply in court—it also plays a significant role in insurance claims. Tennessee is an at-fault insurance state, meaning the at-fault party’s insurer is responsible for covering the injured party’s damages. During settlement negotiations, insurance adjusters often use the comparative fault rule to reduce the amount they offer.
For example:
- If an injured claimant is deemed 20% at fault, the insurance company will typically reduce the settlement offer by 20%.
- Insurers may attempt to assign an unfairly high percentage of fault to reduce their liability. This makes it crucial to have skilled legal representation to counter such tactics.
Contact Fox Farley Willis & Burnette
Tennessee’s comparative fault rule ensures that all parties involved in an accident are held accountable for their actions, but it can significantly impact the compensation an injured party receives. Understanding how fault is determined and working to minimize your share of liability are critical steps in maximizing your recovery.
If you or a loved one has been injured due to someone else’s negligence, the experienced attorneys at Fox Farley Willis & Burnette can help. We understand the nuances of Tennessee’s comparative fault laws and will fight to ensure you receive the compensation you deserve.
Navigating personal injury claims can be complex, especially when the comparative fault rule is at play. At Fox Farley Willis & Burnette, our dedicated attorneys serve clients across Clinton, Gatlinburg, Knoxville, LaFollette, Maryville, Pigeon Forge, and Sevierville, Tennessee. We will work tirelessly to protect your rights and secure fair compensation for your injuries. Contact us today for a free consultation to discuss your case.
Source:
Tennessee Code Annotated § 29-11-103
