What happens if you are partially at fault for the accident that injured you? In many states, any share of blame would disqualify you from recovering compensation entirely. Minnesota takes a different approach. Under the state’s modified comparative fault rule, you can still pursue a claim even if you share some responsibility for what happened. But there are limits, and understanding where those limits fall can make a real difference in the outcome of your case.
What the Law Says
Minnesota’s comparative fault statute is found at Minn. Stat. § 604.01. The core rule is straightforward: contributory fault does not bar recovery as long as the injured person’s share of fault is not greater than the fault of the person or people being sued. In practice, this means you can recover compensation if you are 50% or less at fault. If you are found to be 51% or more responsible, you are barred from collecting anything.
When fault is shared, your compensation is reduced in proportion to your percentage of responsibility. If a jury determines your total damages are $200,000 and you were 20% at fault, your recovery would be reduced to $160,000. If you were 50% at fault, you would receive $100,000. At 51%, you would receive nothing.
How Fault Is Determined
Fault percentages are not arbitrary. They are assigned by a jury (or a judge in a bench trial) based on the evidence presented. The court examines each party’s conduct and determines how much each contributed to causing the accident and the resulting injuries.
In a car accident case, for example, one driver may have been speeding while the other failed to signal a lane change. Both drivers contributed to the crash, but the jury must decide how much blame each one deserves. In a truck accident, the injured driver might bear some fault for following too closely, while the trucking company bears a larger share for allowing a fatigued driver behind the wheel.
Evidence that plays a role in fault allocation includes police reports, witness testimony, traffic camera footage, accident reconstruction analysis, and vehicle damage patterns. The stronger your evidence showing the other party’s negligence, the lower the fault percentage likely to be assigned to you.
What Counts as “Fault” Under Minnesota Law
Minnesota defines “fault” broadly. Under § 604.01, Subd. 1a, it includes acts or omissions that are negligent or reckless, conduct that creates strict tort liability, breach of warranty, unreasonable assumption of risk, product misuse, and unreasonable failure to avoid an injury or mitigate damages. This wide definition means that comparative fault can apply in nearly any type of personal injury case, not just motor vehicle accidents.
A slip and fall claim might involve comparative fault if the property owner argues you were texting while walking and failed to notice an obvious hazard. A dog bite case might involve it if the defense claims you provoked the animal. In each situation, the defendant will look for reasons to shift blame to you, and the percentage they succeed in assigning directly reduces what you take home.
Multiple Defendants and Joint Liability
Accidents frequently involve more than two parties. Minnesota addresses this through its joint liability rules under Minn. Stat. § 604.02. When multiple defendants share responsibility, fault is divided among all of them. A defendant whose share of fault exceeds 50% can be held jointly and severally liable for the entire award, meaning you can collect the full amount from that party even if the others cannot pay. Defendants with less than 50% fault are generally liable only for their proportional share.
This matters in cases where one defendant is uninsured or has limited resources. If a semi-truck crash involves both a negligent driver and a trucking company with a history of safety violations, the company’s larger share of fault can provide the injured party with a path to full recovery.
How Comparative Fault Affects Insurance Negotiations
Insurance companies are well aware of Minnesota’s comparative fault rule, and they use it aggressively during negotiations. An adjuster may argue that you were 30% at fault for an accident when the evidence supports a much lower number, or no fault at all. Their goal is to reduce the payout by inflating your share of blame.
This is one of the strongest reasons to have legal representation early in the process. An attorney can counter inflated fault allegations with evidence, push back against lowball settlement offers, and make sure the percentage assigned to you reflects reality rather than an insurer’s strategy.
Protect Your Right to Fair Compensation
If you have been injured in an accident and the other side is claiming you share fault, you still have options. Minnesota law protects your right to recover as long as your responsibility does not exceed 50%. The key is building a strong case that minimizes your fault allocation and maximizes the compensation you receive.
Whether your accident happened in Eagan, Minneapolis, or anywhere else in the state, the attorneys at Bennerotte & Associates can help you understand how comparative fault applies to your case. Contact us for a free consultation. You pay nothing unless we win.
