Kentucky’s Comparative Negligence Rule
The concept of negligence surrounds many legal issues. Negligence is defined as failure to exercise the degree of reasonable care that an objectively prudent person would exercise in the same or similar circumstances. In tort law, negligence is often used in personal injury and property damage cases. In Kentucky, comparative negligence governs how fault is attributed when two or more parties are involved in a single incident. The notion of “comparative negligence” allows for individuals who are partly responsible for their own injuries to recover a portion of their damages.
Kentucky statutorily adopted comparative negligence in 1976 with the enactment of Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 411.182. KRS 411.182 is commonly referred to as Kentucky’s Comparative Fault Statute and it applies to any civil action involving multiple parties who are found to be at fault in causing an injury or property damage. The statute provides that liability shall be apportioned among the parties based upon the respective fault of each party. While some states follow the “all-or-nothing” rule, where any amount of culpability in negligence by the injured party eliminates their right to recover any damages, Kentucky’s comparative negligence statute has become progressive. Each party is attributed a percentage of fault based upon their level of negligence and their level of culpability in causing the incident. The total amount of fault attributed to each party cannot exceed 100 percent, and regardless of how much fault each party bears, the injured party may still recover damages for their injury.
In Kentucky, if an injured party is found to be less than 50 percent at fault for their own injuries, they may still recover damages—albeit decreased from their total amount of losses. The amount recovered will be reduced by the percentage of fault attributed to the injured party. For example, if a plaintiff suffers $100,000 in damages from a car accident, and the court finds them to be 40% at fault for their own injuries, their damage award would be reduced to $60,000. On the other hand, if the court finds the injured party to be 50 percent or more at fault for their own injuries, they are barred from recovering any damages in a civil suit.
The concept of comparative negligence is complex, and understanding the role it plays in civil actions requires careful analysis and interpretation. As a first step in any potential personal injury case, individuals should confirm whether comparative negligence rules apply in the state in which they are seeking to bring their claim. In Kentucky, the comparative fault rule applies to all civil actions filed within the state. The statute of limitations to bring a civil action in Kentucky is typically one year from the date of injury. It is important to be aware of the applicable statute of limitations in the applicable jurisdiction, failure to timely file a claim may result in the injured party’s claim being barred.
While comparative negligence can be used to decide liability in a civil action, it can also be used as a defense to certain civil suits. For example, a defense counsel may use comparative negligence principles to argue that the injuries sustained by their client were partially caused by the plaintiff’s own negligence. The defense counsel will then present evidence to the court demonstrating how the plaintiff failed to exercise the degree of reasonable care that an objectively prudent person would have used in the same or similar circumstances. Furthermore, if the jury finds that the plaintiff was more than 50 percent at fault for their own injuries, then they can bar the plaintiff’s claim entirely.
While comparative negligence can be both a useful tool in determining liability (or lack thereof) in civil actions, its application is far from straightforward. It is important to understand where the line falls between fault that is attributed and the percentage of fault attributed to the respective party. Furthermore, while the plaintiff in Kentucky may still recover damages if they are less than 50 percent at fault for their own injuries, a finding of any degree of fault attributed to the plaintiff may decrease the amount of damages an injured party can recover from a personal injury lawsuit.
