The Impact of Nevada’s Modified Comparative Fault Law


Nevada’s laws apply a standard of modified comparative fault to lawsuits involving car accidents. Find out how this law can impact the damages you are eligible to receive during a trial.

How Modified Comparative Fault Can Impact Your Car Accident Lawsuit

When you hire an auto accident lawyer Henderson after you have been injured in a crash, it’s easy to assume that you will receive compensation for 100 percent of the damages caused by the accident. However, a quirk in Nevada’s state law means that you may only receive a fraction of the settlement you expected depending on the result of the case.

What Is Modified Comparative Fault?

In many states, a person who is found to be at fault in a car accident pays for 100 percent of the damages. Nevada’s law is based on the concept of modified comparative fault, which allows for a judge or jury to find that the fault is shared between multiple parties in the case of an accident.

How Modified Comparative Fault Impacts Verdicts

During a civil trial, a judge or jury can determine that the plaintiff was partially at fault for the accident which caused their injuries. For example, a pedestrian who is struck by a car when crossing the street can be found to be 40 percent responsible for the accident if they ran out into the crosswalk after the light began to flash. If this is the case, they might only receive $6,000 if their medical expenses were $10,000.

How Modified Comparative Fault Can Eliminate Claims

According to Nevada law you are eligible to receive a partial settlement on damages sustained in an accident if you are found to be less than 50 percent responsible for the accident taking place, If the court determines that you are at least 50 percent at fault for the accident, you cannot win a lawsuit and receive compensation for medical bills, damages or pain and suffering. For this reason, many cases in Nevada are settled out of court if the victim is potentially at fault.