In many civil injury lawsuits, the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the defendant negligently caused their injuries and should be held liable. However, defendants have ways of flipping the script to evade liability. One such way is to argue that the plaintiff is partially responsible for the accident. If this happens, courts must apply the rules of comparative negligence.
South Carolina has not always followed the rule of comparative negligence. In the past, the state followed a much harsher rule of pure contributory negligence that made recovering damages impossible if the plaintiff was even the slightest bit at fault. The Supreme Court of South Carolina changed the rule, and now the state follows a rule of modified comparative negligence. Generally, a plaintiff’s damages may be reduced in proportion to their share of blame, and they may be barred from recovery if they are more than 50% responsible for their accident.
Contact our South Carolina personal injury attorneys with Rice, Murtha & Psoras for a free case assessment by calling us at (803) 219-4906.
How Comparative Negligence Works in South Carolina
In the past, South Carolina followed a rule of pure contributory negligence. This incredibly harsh rule bars a plaintiff from recovering damages if they are even the slightest bit responsible for the accident in their case. This all changed in 1991 when the Supreme Court of South Carolina ruled in Nelson v. Concrete Supply Company that the old rule was unjustly harsh and that the more popular rule of modified comparative negligence was more equitable.
Generally, under a rule of modified comparative negligence, if a plaintiff is deemed partially responsible for the accident and their injuries, their overall damages may be diminished in proportion to their share of the blame. They may still recover damages even if they are partly at fault for the accident. For example, if a jury decides that the plaintiff is responsible for 15% of the accident, their damages may be reduced by 15%. Again, they may still recover damages.
If the jury determines that the plaintiff is more than 50% responsible, the plaintiff may be completely barred from recovering damages. This means the plaintiff walks away with nothing and does not receive any compensation. In such a case, our South Carolina personal injury lawyers must present strong evidence showing that your actions did not contribute to the accident.
If a defendant wants the court to consider their claims of comparative negligence, they need to have some evidence to back them up. The court is unlikely to entertain baseless claims that the plaintiff contributed to the accident.
How Fault is Determined Under Comparative Negligence Rules in South Carolina
The purpose of comparative fault is to determine if the plaintiff shares responsibility for the accident that caused their injuries. If they do, the jury or judge must determine what portion of the blame falls to the plaintiff, as expressed as a percentage. So, how does a judge or jury decide what percentage of blame belongs to the plaintiff?
Numerous factors and conditions must be considered. The overall accident and everything leading up to it may be reviewed and analyzed. For example, in a car accident case, the jury might review evidence of the plaintiff’s actions leading up to and during the collision. Were they speeding? Did they run a red light? Were they driving recklessly? The jury might come to the conclusion that the plaintiff is not totally blameless. Alternatively, they might find that the plaintiff did nothing wrong.
The actions of all parties involved will likely be considered. Remember, if the jury must determine the plaintiff’s percentage of fault, they must do the same for the defendant. This means any reckless or negligent behavior of the defendant must be considered when examining the plaintiff’s actions.
The laws that apply to the case may also be important. If the plaintiff did something to break a rule or law, the jury might be inclined to deem them partially responsible. For example, if you were injured in a car accident case but were also found to have violated the traffic code before the crash, you might be assigned a bit of the blame.
How Does Comparative Negligence in South Carolina Work if There is More Than One Defendant?
In some cases, a plaintiff sues more than one defendant. This can make claims of comparative negligence difficult to navigate, as there are multiple parties whose actions and behavior must all be examined. In some cases, one defendant might only be minimally responsible, while the other is the one primarily at fault. Sometimes, laws of joint and several liability apply, making both defendants equally liable for damages regardless of their share of fault. However, a defendant may argue against this.
According to S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-15(A), if one of several defendants is found to be less than 50% responsible for indivisible damages, the joint and several liability rules may not apply. Instead, they may only be responsible for their specific share of the damages. If one defendant is only 10% responsible while the other defendant is 90% responsible, the first defendant may argue that they should only be responsible for paying 10% of the damages. Under regular rules of joint and several liability, multiple defendants would be equally responsible for paying indivisible damages.
These determinations may depend on the outcome of comparative negligence claims. If a plaintiff is found to share blame, the defendants may be able to reduce their liability further and try to avoid paying for damages. Having evidence of all the defendants’ negligence, as well as evidence of your own behavior and how it did not contribute to the accident, may help you make sure you get all the compensation you deserve.
Speak to Our South Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys About Your Case Now
Contact our Columbia, SC personal injury attorneys with Rice, Murtha & Psoras for a free case assessment by calling us at (803) 219-4906.