Arizona · Personal injury · Trial-ready representation
Arizona uses pure comparative negligence, meaning your recovery isn't barred even if you share fault. Here's how it works in real cases.
Arizona is one of a small group of states that uses pure comparative negligence. That single rule shapes nearly every injury claim in the state — from rear-end collisions to multi-defendant trucking cases.
The rule, plainly
A jury values your damages at $100,000 and finds:
The same case in a “modified comparative negligence” state with a 50% bar (most of the country) would yield the same result. But push your share to 51%, and many states would zero you out — Arizona would still award $49,000.
In a settlement, the percentages are negotiated between counsel and the insurer based on the evidence. In litigation, they’re decided by the jury. The factors that move the number include:
Police report findings and citations
Influential at the negotiation stage; not binding at trial.
Independent witness statements
Especially statements taken in the days after the crash.
Surveillance and dashcam footage
Often the cleanest evidence — when preserved.
Vehicle event-data recorder downloads
Speed, brake, throttle, seatbelt status — disputable percentages become factual ones.
Reconstruction expert analysis
In serious cases, an engineer can model what physically had to occur.
Phone records
Distracted-driving allegations resolve quickly when records are pulled.
The most common pattern: the insurer accepts that their driver was “mostly” at fault but suggests you were 20–40% responsible — for following too closely, not braking sooner, having a vehicle older than five years, or any number of other quiet attributions. Each percentage point of “your fault” is a percentage point off your recovery.
A skilled firm pushes back with documented evidence at every step, often turning a “60/40 split” into a “100/0” liability admission before the demand even goes out.
A short conversation with an attorney can save weeks of guesswork.
