In the state of Indiana, Slip and fall incidents can result in significant challenges, one of those is determining comparative fault. The legal principle of comparative fault plays a pivotal role in determining the compensation the injured party will ultimately receive. If you have experienced a slip and fall incident which resulted in injury, understanding this principle is key. Keep reading to learn more.
What is Comparative Fault?
At its core, comparative fault is a concept which distributes responsibility between an injured individual and the party who is held accountable for the incident. In Indiana, when an individual experiences a slip and fall injury, a jury assesses the percentage of fault assigned to the injured party. Any damages received by the injured party is therefore reduced by that determined percentage. For example, if a jury determines that an individual is 10% at fault for a slip and fall incident and awards $100 in damages, the individual would receive $90 in compensation.
Comparative Versus Contributory Negligence
While comparative fault is the prevailing norm, when a government agency is involved, Indiana deploys contributory fault. Under this strict rule, if the individual injured is found at fault, even if just by 1%, any recovery is prohibited. If you or someone you know has experienced a slip and fall incident at a government agency, such as a police station, it is crucial to secure a personal injury attorney who can help navigate the legal complexities involved in such cases.
Read more here.
