When a pedestrian suffers an accident because of a car, it usually results in significant damage done to the pedestrian with minimal damage to the car. Hence, “Pedestrians should always go first,” People tend to believe that it is always the fault of the driver if he hit a pedestrian but that’s not entirely accurate. In this blog post, I will cover both aspects in a car vs. pedestrian who is at fault.
How to know when a car driver is at fault in a pedestrian accident
Of course, there is always blame for a car driver in particular accidents. Things such as ignoring red lights, not giving the right away to pedestrians at a crosswalk, or turning right on a red light when a pedestrian is crossing the streets are a few common scenarios where the car driver is at fault in the accident.
However, in most cases, pedestrians may have a higher chance of not getting into an accident when we compare it to car accidents. The reason is that pedestrians can choose where to go; for example, should you walk on the shoulder, sidewalk or roadway. Cars do not have that flexibility.
How do you know what is right from wrong from a legal perspective? Like the majority of lawsuits, the negligence law will determine who is at fault in an accident in cars vs. pedestrian’s case.
There are laws which must be followed by both the car driver and the pedestrians which are commonly referred to as “rules of the road.” Here is an example if person C commits an action which causes harm to person D, the law will interpret person C guilty of a negligent act, no matter whether the individual was in a car or walking.
If for example you were driving and a pedestrian walks in the middle of the street when there is traffic and causes an accident he would be considered at fault. If the car driver had the means to take the proper precautions when driving and instead of hitting the pedestrian, he hit a parked car then the pedestrian would be at fault in the accident.
The pedestrian would also be held responsible for damages to the car or any injuries.
What happens when the accident was because of multiple people in a car crash case?
Often, the driver and the pedestrian are to blame for the automobile accident. As mentioned above, if the pedestrian was at fault. Let’s say a driver was speeding at 35 mph in a 20-mph zone, it would be the driver and pedestrians who would be are guilty of the accident. Thus, sharing the fault.
In the example, above, state laws are different from one another. The results of a personal injury claim will also be different depending on which state the accident happened. There are a few states which have what is known as contributory and comparative negligence, I have explained in detail what is.
Essentially, a negligent contribution is when the defendant can prove the plaintiff’s negligence in the accident. Even if the claimant’s fault were 1%, he would not able to claim compensation from the defendant. In comparative negligence, it would be the fault of both the defendant and the plaintiffs.
To break it down ever further there are two rules to comparative negligence:
- Pure comparative
- Modified comparative
Pure comparative is when the compensation is divided by the percentage of who is at fault. An example would be, if the driver is thirty percent responsible, the pedestrian is seventy percent responsible, and the car drives damages are $20,000, the car driver would be able to obtain $14,000 from the pedestrian.
Modified comparative is when the claim is divided depending on the percent of the fault, to a degree. Usually, 50% fault, if exceeded would prevent the plaintiff from compensation.