What Happens to My Injury Claim If I Was Partly at Fault in Massachusetts?

In Massachusetts, you can still recover compensation if you were partly at fault for an accident, as long as your share of fault is 50 percent or less. The amount you collect is reduced by your percentage of fault. If you are found 51 percent or more at fault, you recover nothing. This rule is codified in M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 85, and it applies to car accidents, slip-and-falls, motorcycle crashes, and most other negligence-based injury claims in the state.

The Massachusetts Comparative Negligence Rule

Massachusetts follows a “modified comparative negligence” system. It replaced the old contributory negligence rule, which barred recovery entirely if the plaintiff was even 1 percent at fault. The current statute, M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 85, creates a clear threshold: plaintiffs at or below 50 percent fault recover a proportionally reduced award; plaintiffs above 50 percent recover nothing.

Answer Capsule

Massachusetts uses modified comparative negligence under M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 85. If you were partly at fault for your accident, your compensation is reduced by your share of fault. A plaintiff who is 30 percent at fault on a $100,000 case recovers $70,000. A plaintiff who is 51 percent at fault recovers zero. The jury determines each party’s percentage of fault. Shared fault is common in rear-end collisions, left-turn accidents, slip-and-falls where the plaintiff ignored a visible warning, and multi-vehicle crashes. An attorney can assess whether the other side’s fault narrative is inflated and challenge it with evidence.

How the Reduction Actually Works

The math is straightforward. The jury (or, in a settlement, the parties) assigns each party a percentage of total fault. The plaintiff’s damages award is then reduced by the plaintiff’s fault percentage.

Example: You are rear-ended at a stop light in Boston but the insurer argues you stopped abruptly without signaling. The jury finds your total damages are $80,000 and that you were 20 percent at fault. Your net recovery is $64,000 ($80,000 minus 20 percent).

The 51 percent bar: If the same jury found you 51 percent at fault, you recover zero dollars, regardless of how serious your injuries are or how much fault the defendant still bears. This cutoff makes the assignment of fault percentages enormously consequential.

What Counts as Comparative Fault in Massachusetts

Fault is measured against the standard of what a reasonably careful person would have done in the same situation. In practice, insurance adjusters and defense attorneys will scan for any conduct on your part that they can label as negligence. Common examples:

In car accident cases:

• Driving above the posted speed limit, even if the other driver ran a red light
• Following too closely before a rear-end collision
• Driving without a seatbelt (see the seatbelt exception below)
• Distracted driving, including looking at a phone or a passenger at the moment of impact
• Left-turn maneuvers where the turning driver bears some portion of shared fault

In slip-and-fall cases:

• Walking in an area marked with a visible wet-floor sign
• Wearing footwear that a reasonable person would recognize as unsafe for the conditions
• Using a shortcut through an area not open to the public

In motorcycle accident cases:

• Filtering between lanes or lane-splitting (not explicitly permitted under Massachusetts law)
• Operating without a helmet (Massachusetts requires helmets for all riders under M.G.L. c. 90, sec. 7; the effect on damages is a contested issue)

The insurer’s job is to find conduct like this and argue it represents a large share of the total fault. Your job, with an attorney’s help, is to counter that narrative with evidence.

The Seatbelt Exception in Massachusetts

Massachusetts has a specific statutory rule on seatbelts and comparative fault. Under M.G.L. c. 90, sec. 7B, evidence that a plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt may be introduced in a civil case to reduce damages attributable to injuries that the seatbelt would have prevented. However, seatbelt non-use cannot be used to establish the plaintiff’s negligence for the underlying accident itself; it is limited to the portion of injuries caused or worsened by the failure to buckle up.

This distinction matters. The defendant cannot use your failure to wear a seatbelt to push you above the 51 percent fault threshold; they can only argue it reduced the severity of injuries the defendant otherwise caused.

How Fault Is Assigned in Practice

In a jury trial, the judge instructs the jury on comparative negligence and the jury returns a special verdict form that assigns a percentage of fault to each party and sets total damages. The court then applies the reduction mathematically.

In the far more common scenario, a settlement negotiation is where fault percentages are argued. The insurer’s adjuster will put forward their fault assessment, your attorney will contest it with evidence, and the settlement amount implicitly reflects the negotiated fault split. Insurance adjusters routinely start with an inflated fault percentage for the plaintiff. An experienced attorney knows the range of fault percentages that hold up in the local courts and can push back accordingly.

Multiple defendants: When more than one defendant contributed to your injury, the jury assigns a percentage of fault to each. Massachusetts follows a several liability approach for most claims, meaning each defendant generally pays only their proportionate share of your damages.

Why the Insurer Tries to Inflate Your Fault Percentage

Every point of fault the insurer can attribute to you reduces their payout by a proportional amount. More importantly, if they can push your number to 51 percent or higher, they pay nothing. Adjusters are trained to use recorded statements, police reports, social media posts, and surveillance footage to build a comparative fault argument against you.

Common tactics:

• Calling you for a recorded statement before you have an attorney, then using your own words to argue you were distracted or speeding
• Pulling your cell phone records to show activity at the time of the crash
• Pointing to a prior injury or medical condition to argue you would not have been hurt as badly by a “careful” person
• Reviewing your social media for photographs showing physical activity inconsistent with your claimed injuries

Jim Glaser Law reviews the insurer’s fault analysis and counters it at every stage. The firm works with accident reconstructionists, medical experts, and investigators to build the fault narrative that the evidence supports.

How the Defendant’s Insurance Company Handles Partial-Fault Claims in Massachusetts

Massachusetts is a no-fault insurance state for minor auto injury claims. Under M.G.L. c. 90, sec. 34M, drivers are required to carry Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage of at least $8,000, which pays your medical bills and a portion of lost wages regardless of fault.

The comparative negligence rule under M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 85 applies once you step outside the no-fault PIP system and pursue a tort claim against the at-fault party. For most serious injury cases, including broken bones, spinal injuries, traumatic brain injury, and cases exceeding the PIP limit, the tort track is where comparative fault becomes central to the claim’s value.

What to Do If the Insurance Company Says You Were Mostly at Fault

Do not accept the insurer’s fault assessment as final. The insurer’s adjuster works for the insurance company, not for you, and their initial fault assessment is a negotiating position, not a court ruling.

If an adjuster tells you that you were 40 percent, 60 percent, or “mostly” at fault:

1. Do not give a recorded statement without speaking to an attorney first.
2. Document everything you remember about the accident, in writing, as soon as possible.
3. Preserve all physical evidence: vehicle damage photographs, clothing, surveillance video requests, medical records from the day of the accident.
4. Request a copy of the police report and check it for accuracy. Officers sometimes record statements from the at-fault party that misrepresent what happened; errors can be challenged.
5. Call Jim Glaser Law at (617) JIM-WINS for a free case review before agreeing to any settlement.

The firm evaluates comparative fault arguments and will tell you honestly whether the insurer’s position is within a reasonable range or is inflated beyond what the evidence supports.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is comparative negligence in Massachusetts?

A: Massachusetts comparative negligence, governed by M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 85, is the rule that reduces your injury compensation by your percentage of fault for the accident. If your fault share is 50 percent or less, you recover a proportionally reduced amount. If it is 51 percent or more, you recover nothing.

Q: Can I recover anything if I was 50 percent at fault in Massachusetts?

A: Yes. At exactly 50 percent fault, you still recover 50 percent of your total damages. The cutoff that eliminates recovery is 51 percent or greater. Call Jim Glaser Law at (617) JIM-WINS to discuss your specific situation.

Q: What if I was not wearing a seatbelt when I was injured?

A: Under Massachusetts law, seatbelt non-use can reduce the damages attributed to injuries the seatbelt would have prevented, but it cannot be used to establish your negligence for the accident itself and cannot push your fault percentage above the 51 percent bar on its own. The legal effect is limited to the portion of your injuries worsened by not buckling up.

Q: Does the 51 percent rule apply to slip-and-fall cases, not just car accidents?

A: Yes. M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 85 applies to all negligence-based personal injury claims in Massachusetts, including slip-and-falls, motorcycle accidents, dog bites, and premises liability cases, not only car accidents.

Q: What happens if there are multiple defendants and I was partly at fault?

A: The jury assigns a fault percentage to each party. Your recovery from each defendant is reduced by your fault share, and in most cases each defendant pays only their proportional share of your total damages. The interaction between multiple defendants and comparative fault can significantly affect your net recovery; discuss the specific facts with an attorney.

Q: Will my own words in a recorded statement be used to increase my fault percentage?

A: Yes, absolutely. Insurers use recorded statements as evidence of comparative fault. Statements about your speed, your attention, and what you saw before impact are all used in the fault analysis. Do not give a recorded statement to any insurer without speaking to Jim Glaser Law first. The intake call is free.

Q: Is Jimmy Knows AI giving me legal advice?

A: No. This article provides general Massachusetts legal information. It is not legal advice for your specific situation. Call Jim Glaser Law at (617) JIM-WINS for advice about your particular claim.