Partly at fault? How Delaware's comparative negligence rule affects an injury claim

Sharing some blame does not automatically end a claim

Insurance adjusters often suggest that an injured person was not watching where they were going. Under Delaware's comparative negligence statute, 10 Del. C. § 8132, a plaintiff's own negligence does not bar recovery unless it is greater than the negligence of the defendant or defendants against whom recovery is sought. Damages are then reduced in proportion to the plaintiff's share of fault.

In practical terms, a person found 20% responsible may see an award reduced by 20%. A person found more responsible than the defendants combined may recover nothing. Fault percentages are decided from evidence, not from an adjuster's first statement.

Why this matters in property and fall cases

Property owners frequently argue that a hazard was open and obvious or that the visitor was distracted. Those arguments go to how fault is allocated. Evidence about lighting, warnings, how long a condition existed, inspection practices and footwear can all affect the comparison.

Photographs taken promptly, incident reports, names of witnesses and the clothing and shoes worn at the time can help show what actually happened. Avoid guessing about details you do not remember.

Be careful with early statements

Recorded statements and casual apologies can later be used to argue a higher share of fault. You can be truthful without volunteering conclusions about who was to blame. Delaware's general two-year personal-injury limitation in 10 Del. C. § 8119 also applies to many of these claims, so waiting for an insurer to decide fault is not a safe strategy.

Get the facts reviewed

Michael can review how the incident occurred, what evidence exists and how comparative fault may be argued. The evaluation is free, and every case is evaluated on its own merits.