Most car accidents are not clean-cut situations where one driver is entirely at fault and the other is entirely innocent. In many collisions, both drivers contribute to what happened, whether through a momentary lapse in attention, a failure to yield, or a combination of factors on both sides. When fault is shared, many injury victims assume they have no viable claim — but Kansas law tells a different story.
At Hollis Law Firm, we help car accident victims throughout Kansas and Missouri understand how shared fault affects their right to recover compensation. Our team takes the time to listen to your situation, explain how the law applies to your case, and help you make informed decisions about how to move forward. We are your guides, and we take that responsibility seriously.
How Kansas Handles Shared Fault
Kansas follows a legal framework known as modified comparative negligence, which means fault is divided among the parties involved rather than assigned entirely to one driver. Under K.S.A. 60-258a, an injured person can still recover compensation even if they were partially at fault for the accident, as long as their share of the fault is less than 50%. If fault reaches 50% or more, the right to recover damages is eliminated entirely.
This rule is sometimes called the 50% bar. It reflects Kansas law’s approach to fairness: a party who bears less blame than the other driver is not shut out from recovery, but a party who is equally or more responsible cannot collect from the other side. Understanding how Kansas comparative negligence laws apply to your specific accident is a critical part of evaluating your options after a crash.
How Fault Percentages Reduce Compensation
The percentage of fault assigned to each driver directly reduces the compensation available to the injured party. For example, if a driver sustains $100,000 in damages but is found 30% at fault for the collision, they can recover $70,000 — a reduction equal to their share of responsibility. The more fault attributed to the injured party, the smaller the recovery, even if the other driver was clearly negligent.
This proportional reduction applies to medical expenses, lost wages, property damage, pain and suffering, and other recognized forms of compensation. The value of a car accident claim in a shared-fault situation depends heavily on how fault is ultimately assigned and what damages can be documented and proven.
Who Determines How Fault Is Divided
Fault percentages are not simply agreed upon between the parties. In most cases, insurance adjusters will initially assign fault during the claims process, often in ways favoring their own policyholders. If a case goes to trial, a jury will weigh the evidence and assign fault percentages to each party based on the facts presented.
Several types of evidence influence how fault is distributed, including police reports, witness statements, traffic camera footage, physical damage to the vehicles, and accident reconstruction analysis. A personal injury lawyer plays a meaningful role in gathering this evidence and presenting a clear picture of what actually happened, countering an insurer’s attempt to assign more fault than the facts support.
Why the Insurance Company’s Assessment Is Not Final
One of the most important things to understand in a shared-fault accident is that the insurance company’s initial determination is not binding. Insurers have a financial incentive to assign as much fault as possible to the injured party in order to limit their payout. An early offer or fault determination made shortly after the accident may not reflect a fair or accurate assessment of the situation.
Some of the most common arguments insurers use to shift fault onto injured drivers include:
- Speeding: Claiming the injured party was traveling above the posted limit, even when the other driver’s action was the primary cause of the collision.
- Following too closely: Arguing the injured driver did not maintain a safe following distance, particularly in rear-end situations.
- Failure to yield: Suggesting the injured party had a responsibility to yield, regardless of road conditions or what the other driver was doing at the time.
Each of these arguments can be challenged with the right evidence, and doing so may meaningfully change the outcome of a claim.
Contact Hollis Law Firm for a Case Evaluation
Hollis Law Firm serves injury victims throughout Kansas and Missouri who need honest guidance after a car accident where fault is shared or disputed. Our philosophy is straightforward: we listen, we educate you on your options, and we take action based on your decisions. We are committed to representing clients who have been wronged and pursuing the fair compensation they deserve, regardless of how complicated the fault picture may appear at first.
If you were in an accident where fault is being questioned, reach out to Hollis Law Firm today to schedule a consultation and get a clear picture of where your case stands.
