If you get injured in an accident, it’s 100% the other person’s fault, right? Not always. If you made a small mistake behind the wheel, that error could later be used to reduce your final settlement. Fortunately, under the Indiana comparative fault law (IC 34-51-2), sharing a portion of the blame does not automatically ruin your chance of getting paid.
Whether your accident happened in Merrillville, Valparaiso, or anywhere else across Lake and Porter Counties, your ability to recover damages depends on how much of the crash was your fault. Lerner and Rowe explains how Indiana’s comparative fault rules work and what you can do to protect your claim to a fair settlement.
IC 34-51-2 Explained
Indiana Code Title 34, Article 51, Chapter 2 (IC 34-51-2) is the official state statute passed by the Indiana General Assembly. This law establishes the rules for “comparative fault” in civil cases. In plain language, this statute provides the legal framework that Indiana courts use to divide financial responsibility when more than one person is to blame for an accident.
Instead of treating an accident as entirely one person’s fault, the allocation of fault is fact-specific, allowing a judge or jury to allocate blame using percentages. Everyone’s share of the responsibility must add up to exactly 100%. It also creates accountability for everyone who is driving and/or speeding.
Indiana comparative fault also allows fault to be allocated to nonparties in appropriate circumstances. A defendant can identify a nonparty whose fault contributed to the injury, potentially reducing the defendant’s share of liability.
What Is the Indiana 51% Rule?
The core of this law revolves around what legal systems call a “modified comparative fault” system. Under this system, the state uses a strict cutoff to determine who is legally permitted to recover financial damages. This is often referred to as the 51% bar rule. Here is how it applies:
- 50% or Less: If the court determines you are 50% or less responsible for the crash, you maintain your right to seek financial compensation. However, the total money awarded to you is reduced by your exact percentage of blame.
- 51% or More: According to the statute, if the court finds you are 51% or more responsible, you are barred from recovery. The law considers you the primary cause of the accident, meaning you cannot collect any money from the other parties.
Examples of the Different Percentages of Fault
Imagine you are in a car crash and the court determines your medical bills and property damage total $100,000.
- Scenario A (You are 25% at fault): Because you are under the 51% limit, you may be eligible for compensation. However, your $100,000 payout is reduced by your 20% share of the blame. The final amount allowed by the court is $75,000.
- Scenario B (You are 51% at fault): Because you hit the 51% threshold, state law may block your recovery for damages. Your final amount would be $0.
Note on Government Claims: Indiana treats claims against state and local government entities differently from most other personal injury cases. Under Indiana law, many negligence claims against governmental entities are governed by Indiana’s contributory negligence doctrine rather than the comparative fault statute. Depending on the circumstances, any contributory negligence by the plaintiff may bar recovery.
How Is Indiana Comparative Fault Law Determined?
As mentioned above, determining comparative fault depends on the evidence presented. When a jury is deciding a case, the judge gives them instructions and reminds them of the statute. Of course, the jury will have reviewed the evidence, including:
- The opinion of expert witnesses.
- Police reports and other relevant documentation.
- Eyewitness testimony from the scene of the injury.
- Other evidence, like videos, if they exist.
If a case proceeds to trial, the judge or jury determines comparative fault.
Dealing with Insurance Companies: Indiana Comparative Fault Law Tactics
The weeks after an accident are tricky. Adjusters are trained to investigate all possible sources of comparative fault. Knowing the common insurance adjuster fault tactics Indiana residents can take action to help protect their claim to just compensation.
The Friendly Phone Call Trap
While you are still in pain at the hospital or resting at home, an adjuster will call. They want your side of the story. They sound caring and ask open questions. But, just know that statements made during these conversations may later be used to argue comparative fault.
Twisting Polite Words
We are taught to be polite. After a crash, you might casually say, “I didn’t even see him,” “The sun was in my eyes,” or “I was running a little late.” Adjusters use these innocent words against you. They claim you were driving distracted or careless.
Digging Into Your Life
Adjusters will check your driving record, look for past claims, and search your social media. If you say your back is badly hurt, but you post a picture smiling at a restaurant a week later, they will use it. They will argue you are faking or that something else caused the pain.
Broad Medical Authorizations
Insurance companies often ask you to sign a medical release form. They claim they just need to check your crash injuries. In truth, some authorizations may permit insurers to obtain extensive medical records. They look for old injuries so they can say your back pain is from an old sports injury, not your Merrillville car wreck.
Beyond Cars: Applying Indiana Comparative Fault Law to Other Accidents
This legal rule isn’t just for highway car crashes. It applies to almost all injury claims in the state.
Truck Accidents
Commercial vehicle crashes are much more complex. In serious commercial truck crashes, trucking companies and their insurers often deploy investigators quickly. If an 18-wheeler hits you, their lawyers start building a case to blame you before the tow trucks even show up. The injuries in these cases are usually severe, so the financial stakes are huge. Getting a skilled truck accident lawyer is key to saving logbooks, maintenance records, and computer data.
Motorcycle Crashes
A comparative-fault motorcycle accident case in Indiana is very hard to win. This is because people often have biases against bikers. Adjusters try to blame motorcyclists by using stereotypes about speeding or weaving through traffic, even without proof. Also, Indiana law does not require adults to wear helmets.
Still, defense attorneys may argue that the rider’s injuries were worsened by the lack of a helmet where legally and factually appropriate. This common trick tries to push the rider’s fault over that 51% mark. If you ride, you need a tough motorcycle accident attorney to defend against any unfair stereotypes.
Premises Liability and Slip and Falls
If you slip on a wet floor in a Lake County store or trip on an icy sidewalk outside a Valparaiso business, the property owner’s insurance will likely blame you. They will say you were texting, ignored a warning sign, or wore the wrong shoes. Property owners and insurers may argue that the plaintiff failed to exercise reasonable care in slip and fall cases.
Wrongful Death
In the saddest cases, families must pick up the pieces after losing a loved one. Even in a wrongful death claim, the defense will try to argue the deceased person was partly to blame. Grieving families should never have to fight these cold corporate tactics alone.
Can the Defendant Use Comparative Fault as a Defense?
Since it can be used to reduce liability, comparative fault is almost always used as a defense strategy in personal injury cases. Here are some examples:
- In a car accident, the defense might try to find some evidence that mitigates the plaintiff’s compensation amount. Was the plaintiff distracted while driving? Were they speeding? This is a defense of comparative fault in a car accident.
- In a slip and fall accident, the defendant might try to determine if the plaintiff was in an area where they weren’t supposed to be.
- The defense might try to undermine the plaintiff’s claim entirely.
Let’s say a plaintiff walked out into the street while talking on the cell phone. The defendant, who was not speeding, did not notice them until it was too late. The defense might focus on cell phone records, witness testimony, and other evidence showing that the plaintiff was distracted. The jury might arrive at a 60% fault determination for the plaintiff and 40% for the defendant. In that situation, the plaintiff is over the 51% fault threshold and the defendant does not owe damages.
Contact an Attorney for Indiana Comparative Fault Law Claims
Contact Lerner and Rowe when you need top legal representation handling difficult Indiana comparative fault law claims. Our injury attorneys have experience recovering fair compensation. Our law firm also won’t charge you a fee unless we get you a settlement thanks to our “no win, no fee” policy.
Reach us by phone at 219-900-8647, LiveChat, or our secure contact form to schedule a free consultation.