Not Guilty, But Also Not Completely Innocent: the Role of Comparative Negligence in Louisiana.

Black-and-white situations are not the norm. In most cases, though, decisions need to be made even if conflicting parties are not entirely wrong, or entirely right.

When we try to prove that a car accident in Louisiana was caused by someone else, most victims start from the assumption that the other party's liability is obvious, or evident.

The problem arises when the defense comes up with a detail that was overlooked, and may have played a role in the crash. Examples: You were rear-ended which puts the blame squarely on the vehicle striking you from behind, but your rear lights didn't function, according to witnesses.

In a number of U.S. states, where the law of pure contributory negligence prevails, this would be enough to kill your case. Fortunately, Louisiana applies the principle of comparative negligence, which means that you may claim damages from the other party that caused the accident, whether or not your own negligence played any role in the crash.

In that case, the recovery for damages could be reduced by the percentage of fault attributed to you. This is called allocation or apportionment of fault.

If you are turning left at an intersection without your turn signal on, and are hit by an oncoming car riding 20 miles per hour above the speed limit, the jury might decide that the collision was caused 70 percent by the speeding vehicle and 30 percent by you, because you failed to signal your intention.

Of course, attributing percentages to define each party's responsibility is very subjective, but this is precisely where an experienced car accident attorney can help you.