If you have been injured in an accident and someone tells you that your case is worthless because you were partly at fault, they are almost certainly wrong. In Missouri, being partially responsible for an accident does not bar you from recovering compensation. It reduces what you recover, but it does not eliminate your claim.

Missouri follows a legal rule called pure comparative fault. It is one of the most favorable fault rules to injured victims in the country. And it is also one of the most misunderstood, both by injured people and by the insurance adjusters who count on that misunderstanding to reduce what they pay.

At Rogers Sevastianos & Bante LLP, we represent injured victims throughout St. Louis, St. Louis County, and the surrounding Missouri region. Here is how Missouri’s comparative fault rule actually works, why it matters to the value of your case, and how insurance companies use it to try to reduce what you recover.

What Is Pure Comparative Fault?

Pure comparative fault is a legal rule that allocates responsibility for an accident between the parties involved, and then reduces the injured party’s recovery by their percentage of fault.

Under Missouri’s pure comparative fault system, if a jury or insurance adjuster determines that you were partially responsible for the accident that caused your injuries, your damages award is reduced by that percentage. The remaining amount is what you actually recover.

For example, suppose your total damages after a car accident are $100,000, and a jury finds that you were 25% at fault for the crash. Under Missouri’s pure comparative fault rule, your recovery would be reduced by 25%, and you would receive $75,000.

Missouri’s rule is called “pure” because there is no cap on how much fault an injured person can carry and still recover. Even a plaintiff found 90% at fault can still recover 10% of their damages under Missouri law.

How Missouri’s Rule Compares to Other States

Missouri’s pure comparative fault approach is significantly more favorable to injured victims than the rules in many other states.

Modified comparative fault states, including many Missouri neighbors, bar recovery once the plaintiff’s fault reaches a certain threshold — usually 50% or 51%. In those states, an injured person found 51% at fault recovers nothing at all.

Contributory negligence states, of which only a handful remain, bar any recovery if the injured person contributed even 1% to their own injury.

Missouri’s rule is at the opposite end of the spectrum. Under Missouri Revised Statutes § 537.765 and Missouri case law, comparative fault reduces but does not eliminate recovery. This distinction matters enormously in real cases, particularly those involving disputed liability.

How Fault Is Determined in Missouri Personal Injury Cases

Fault in a Missouri personal injury case is generally determined by a jury (if the case goes to trial) or negotiated between the parties (if the case settles).

The evidence a jury or insurance adjuster considers when allocating fault typically includes:

• The police report, which often includes an initial determination of fault or contributing factors
• Witness statements from people who saw the accident
• Physical evidence from the scene, including skid marks, vehicle damage, and debris patterns
• Photographs and video of the scene, vehicles, and injuries
• Expert testimony, particularly in complex cases involving accident reconstruction
• Traffic laws and whether either party violated them
• The parties’ own testimony about what happened

Fault is expressed as a percentage. In a case with two parties, the total fault must add up to 100%. In cases with multiple parties, fault can be allocated among all of them.

How Insurance Companies Use Comparative Fault Against You

Insurance companies understand Missouri’s comparative fault rule very well. They also understand that shifting fault onto the injured party reduces what they have to pay — and they use this understanding aggressively.

Common tactics insurance companies use to increase your fault percentage include:

Suggesting you were speeding, distracted, or otherwise negligent. Even if the other party was clearly at fault, an insurer will look for any argument that you contributed to the crash. Speeding, following too closely, texting, failing to wear a seatbelt, or reacting slowly are all common lines of attack.

Using recorded statements against you. Insurance adjusters often ask injured people for recorded statements shortly after the accident. Questions are frequently phrased in ways designed to elicit admissions that can later be used to shift fault.

Arguing about pre-existing conditions. Insurers may argue that some portion of your injuries would have occurred even without the accident, effectively shifting the causation analysis in a way that reduces your recovery.

Pressuring for a quick settlement. Early settlement offers often assume a higher fault percentage than the evidence actually supports. Once you sign a release, the settlement is final regardless of what the evidence would have shown.

The higher the fault percentage the insurer can attribute to you, the less they pay. This is why how fault is investigated and documented matters so much in Missouri personal injury cases.

How Comparative Fault Affects Settlement Negotiations

Most Missouri personal injury cases settle before trial. In settlement negotiations, comparative fault is often the single most contested issue.

Both sides typically agree on the broad outlines of the injuries and damages. Where they disagree is on how fault is allocated. A case that would be worth $500,000 with the plaintiff at 0% fault is worth $250,000 if the plaintiff is 50% at fault. The percentage of fault, in other words, is where a huge portion of settlement value is decided.

Effective negotiation requires not just knowledge of the injuries and damages, but a well-developed factual and legal argument for why the plaintiff bears little or no fault. Physical evidence, expert opinions, and legal analysis all contribute to that argument.

Comparative Fault in Different Types of Missouri Personal Injury Cases

Comparative fault applies across virtually every type of Missouri personal injury case, but it plays out differently in different contexts.

Car and truck accidents. Fault is typically allocated based on which driver violated traffic laws, whose actions were more directly the cause of the collision, and whether either driver failed to take reasonable steps to avoid the crash.

Slip and fall cases. Fault is often disputed based on whether the injured person was paying attention, whether the hazard was open and obvious, and whether the property owner had taken reasonable steps to warn of or fix the hazard.

Product liability cases. Fault can be allocated between the manufacturer, distributor, retailer, and even the user, depending on the specific circumstances.

Motorcycle and bicycle accidents. Comparative fault often becomes a major issue because juries sometimes carry unconscious biases about riders, which experienced attorneys work to counter.

Wrongful death cases. Comparative fault applies here as well. If the deceased was partially at fault for the incident that caused their death, the family’s recovery is reduced by that percentage.

What Comparative Fault Does Not Change

Comparative fault reduces the amount of your recovery. It does not change:

• The legal categories of damages you can recover (medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and so on)
• The three-year statute of limitations for most Missouri personal injury cases
• The five-year statute of limitations for certain property damage or contract-related claims
• The general procedural framework for filing and pursuing a claim

Comparative fault is a value question, not a threshold question. It affects how much you receive, not whether you have a case.

Why Legal Guidance Matters in Comparative Fault Cases

Because fault allocation is where so much of a Missouri personal injury case’s value is decided, how the case is investigated, documented, and presented has an enormous impact on the outcome.

An experienced Missouri personal injury attorney can investigate the accident thoroughly, preserve physical evidence before it disappears, work with experts to establish an accurate accident reconstruction, counter insurance company tactics designed to shift fault, and negotiate or litigate the fault question effectively.

Insurance companies count on injured people not understanding the rules. Represented claimants consistently recover more than those who handle claims on their own — in significant part because they push back effectively on inflated fault claims.

Speak With a St. Louis Personal Injury Attorney

If you have been injured in an accident in Missouri and are concerned about how comparative fault might affect your claim, the personal injury attorneys at Rogers Sevastianos & Bante LLP are here to help. We represent injured victims throughout St. Louis and the surrounding Missouri region, and we understand how to investigate, document, and argue fault effectively.

Contact our office today for a free, confidential consultation.

Disclaimer: The information in this blog is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every legal situation is unique, and you should consult an attorney for personalized guidance on your specific circumstances.