Arizona's Comparative Fault System — What It Means for Your Case

One of the most common questions we get from potential clients is: “Can I still get money if the accident was partially my fault?” In Arizona, the answer is almost always yes — and understanding why requires knowing how Arizona’s comparative fault system works.

Pure Comparative Fault

Arizona follows a pure comparative fault system under A.R.S. § 12-2505. This means your compensation is reduced by your percentage of fault — but never eliminated entirely. If a jury finds you 20% at fault and the defendant 80% at fault on a $200,000 case, you recover $160,000. If you’re 50% at fault, you recover $100,000. Even if you’re 90% at fault, you can still recover 10% of your damages.

This is more favorable than many states. Some states use “modified comparative fault” which bars you from recovering anything if you’re more than 50% at fault. Arizona has no such bar.

How Fault Is Determined

Fault allocation considers all the circumstances: traffic law violations, witness testimony, physical evidence (skid marks, vehicle damage patterns, road conditions), accident reconstruction analysis, police reports, and camera footage.

The insurance company will try to maximize your share of fault because every percentage point they pin on you reduces what they pay. They’ll scrutinize whether you were wearing a seat belt, whether you were on your phone, whether you were speeding even slightly, and whether you reacted as quickly as a “reasonable person” would have.

Common Comparative Fault Scenarios

Rear-end collision where you stopped suddenly. The following driver is almost always primarily at fault for following too closely. But the insurance company may argue you share fault if you stopped abruptly without reason.

Intersection crash where you had a yellow light. If you entered on yellow and were hit by a driver running the red, the insurance company may argue you should have stopped.

Pedestrian accident where you were jaywalking. Even if you crossed outside a crosswalk, the driver still had a duty to exercise care. Your recovery is reduced but not eliminated.

Motorcycle crash where you weren’t wearing a helmet. Arizona doesn’t require adult helmet use, but the defense may argue a helmet would have reduced your injuries.

Why You Need an Attorney for Fault Disputes

The difference between being found 20% at fault and 40% at fault on a $300,000 case is $60,000. Fault allocation is negotiable — and the insurance company will push your number as high as they can. An experienced attorney pushes back with evidence, accident reconstruction, and compelling arguments about who truly caused the crash.

The Law Badgers fight fault allocation aggressively in every case. It’s often where the biggest swings in case value happen.