Connecticut’s Comparative Negligence Rule
Connecticut’s Comparative Negligence Rule is a legal concept that governs personal injury matters in the state of Connecticut. This rule states that when parties are found to share some responsibility for an accident or injury, each party’s award for damages will be reduced in proportion to its degree of fault. In other words, if an accident or injury was found to be 50% the fault of one of the parties, that party’s award for damages will be reduced by 50%.
This rule aims to encourage individuals to take reasonable safety measures while also providing reasonable compensation to those who are injured due to the negligence of others. In Connecticut, overall fault is determined by the “modified comparative negligence rule” which holds that if a plaintiff’s negligence is less than 50%, then the plaintiff can recover damages proportional to the defendant’s or defendants’ fault. For example, if the plaintiff was found to be 20% at fault for an accident, the plaintiff would then be able to collect 80% of their sought-after damages from any of the defendants.
In Connecticut, the plaintiff’s fault must also be determined when another party’s fault is more than 50%. In this case, the plaintiff is unable to recover damages but the other party or parties can still be held liable for the rest of the damages. Connecticut’s pure comparative negligence rule essentially applies a “no-fault” system, where a party can recover damages even if they are found to be 100% responsible for the incident. However, their total award for damages will be reduced according to their degree of fault.
This rule can be applied in a variety of types of personal injury cases, including motor vehicle accidents, premises liability cases (i.e. when a person is injured because of the hazardous conditions on someone else’s property), medical malpractice cases, and many more. While some states have adopted a contributory negligence rule, meaning that the plaintiff’s award for damages is completely erased if it is found that the plaintiff contributed in any way to the accident or personal injury, Connecticut follows the more lenient modified comparative negligence rule.
Aside from personal injury cases, the comparative negligence rule can also be applied in product liability cases where the defendant may try to point out a negligence in how the consumer used the product or service. Even in those cases, the consumer’s award of damages will still be reduced, although not by as much in product liability, since the defendant has some degree of responsibility as well.
The bottom line is that Connecticut’s comparative negligence rule helps to ensure that compensations are not overly generous to one of the parties and serves to promote reasonable safety precautions. Although the defendant in a personal injury trial may have some degree of fault, the plaintiff will still be able to recover some compensation if their negligence was found to be 50% or less. Taken together, the comparative negligence rule in Connecticut provides a fair and balanced outcome to personal injury claims, and helps ensure that responsible individuals are not held fully accountable when they legitimately share some responsibility.
