West Virginia’s Comparative Negligence Rule

West Virginia’s Comparative Negligence Rule: A Comprehensive Overview

West Virginia adheres to the comparative negligence rule in its courts. This rule is a legal principal applied to legally determine fault in cases where there are multiple parties involved in an accident. In West Virginia, this rule allows for liability to be assessed depending on the fault or negligence of each party, rather than holding only one party liable. Because this statute is of such importance, it is important to define, explain, and summarize the comparative negligence rule in West Virginia and its effects on liability.

Defining Comparative Negligence

West Virginia has adopted the comparative negligence model to assess fault in an accident involving multiple parties. In this model, each party’s degree of responsibility is determined, and liability is assessed based on the percentage of fault attributed to each party. As such, any party found to be at least partially responsible for a personal injury or property damage can recover damages from the other at-fault parties. Furthermore, since there are multiple parties involved and different levels of fault, the damages awarded are apportioned according to each party’s degree of negligence.

Explaining the West Virginia Comparative Negligence Rule

The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals first adopted the comparative negligence rule in 1990, with the court case Ballard v. Bechtel Chevrolet, Inc. Since that time, West Virginia courts have consistently applied the rule in personal injury and property damage cases. In the state, the comparative negligence model is known as the “modified comparative negligence” model. This means that each party’s degree of fault is determined in proportion to the amount of damages suffered by the victim. For example, if a plaintiff was injured in a car accident, the court would consider the degree of fault of each party involved, and apportion the damages accordingly.

Under the modified comparative negligence model in West Virginia, a plaintiff can recover damages as long as their fault does not exceed 51%. This means that if a court finds the defendant at fault for more than 51% of the accident, the plaintiff can recover damages. Conversely, if the plaintiff is found to be more than 51% at fault, then they will not be able to recover any damages. In other words, the plaintiff must not be more than 50% responsible for their own damages in order to be eligible to receive damages under West Virginia’s comparative negligence rule.

Adjustment of Damages

Furthermore, once the court has determined the percentage of fault, the total amount of damages is adjusted accordingly. For example, if the plaintiff is awarded $100,000 in total damages and it is determined that they are only 25% at fault, then they will only be able to collect $75,000 of that award. This adjustment of damages is necessary under the comparative negligence model, because it ensures that the parties involved in the accident are not unfairly held responsible for more than their portion of the damages.

Summarizing the Comparative Negligence Rule

In summary, West Virginia has adopted the comparative negligence rule to determine fault and assign damages in cases involving multiple parties. Under this rule, any party who is found to be at least partially responsible for a personal injury or property damage may collect damages from the other at-fault parties in accordance with their degree of fault. Furthermore, the court may adjust the total damages awarded based on the relative fault of each party, and the plaintiff must not be found to be more than 51% at fault in order to recover damages. This rule therefore establishes a fair basis for assigning liability and damages, and makes sure that any party who is at least partially responsible for an accident will not be held unfairly responsible for more than their portion of the damages.