If you were injured in an accident in Massachusetts and someone has suggested that you were partially at fault, you may be wondering whether you can still recover compensation. The answer, in most cases, is yes — and understanding Massachusetts comparative negligence law is essential to knowing how much you can recover.
What Is Comparative Negligence?
Comparative negligence is the legal framework that governs how fault is allocated when multiple parties contributed to an accident. Rather than an all-or-nothing approach, comparative negligence allows courts and juries to assign percentages of fault to different parties and adjust compensation accordingly.
Massachusetts follows a modified comparative negligence rule under M.G.L. Chapter 231, Section 85. Under this rule, you can recover damages for your injuries as long as your share of fault is less than 51%. If you are 51% or more at fault, you are barred from recovery entirely. If your fault is below that threshold, your recovery is reduced proportionally by your percentage of fault.
How Comparative Negligence Works in Practice
Here is a straightforward example. Suppose you are rear-ended at a stoplight but you were checking your phone at the moment of impact. The jury finds the other driver 80% at fault for following too closely and failing to stop in time, and you 20% at fault for distracted driving. Your total damages are $200,000. Under Massachusetts comparative negligence law, your recovery is reduced by 20% — so you receive $160,000 rather than the full $200,000.
Now suppose the jury found you 55% at fault. You recover nothing — because your fault exceeds 50%.
How Insurance Companies Use Comparative Negligence Against You
Insurance adjusters and defense attorneys are well trained in comparative negligence arguments. Assigning more fault to accident victims is one of the most effective tactics for reducing settlement amounts. After a car accident, you may hear suggestions that you were speeding, that you failed to see the hazard, or that your reaction was inadequate. After a slip and fall, you may be told you were wearing improper footwear or ignoring warning signs that were not actually present. After a construction accident, you may be told you violated a safety rule — even if you were never trained on it.
These fault arguments often lack a legitimate basis, but they can be persuasive if you are not represented by an experienced attorney who knows how to challenge them.
What to Do if the Insurance Company Is Claiming You Were at Fault
Do not accept fault assignment without consulting an attorney. In many cases, what looks like shared fault is actually the result of an incomplete investigation that missed evidence of the defendant’s negligence. A thorough review of surveillance footage, witness statements, expert analysis, and applicable safety regulations often reveals that the defendant bore far more responsibility than their initial position suggests.
At Larson Law, our Massachusetts personal injury attorneys push back aggressively against unfair fault assignments. We investigate every aspect of how the accident occurred, engage experts when appropriate, and build the strongest possible case for our clients’ full recovery. If you were injured in Massachusetts and the insurance company is trying to pin fault on you, contact us for a free consultation.
Results Disclaimer: Past case results, settlements, and verdicts mentioned on this website do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome in any future case. Every case is unique and depends on its own facts and legal issues.