Short answer: YES! You can still get fair compensation for your damages even if you were speeding. The long answer is below:
Imagine this: You’re driving down a familiar road, perhaps a bit faster than the posted speed limit. It’s late, the street is quiet, and you’re in a hurry to get home. As you approach an intersection, another driver suddenly pulls out of a parking lot without warning, directly into your path. You hit the brakes, but it’s too late. The crash happens in an instant, leaving you with damage to your car, injuries, and a looming question: Can you recover damages for the accident, even though you were speeding?
This scenario might sound familiar to many drivers, and it raises an important legal question about how fault is determined in car accidents. While speeding is a factor that can influence fault, it doesn’t necessarily mean you’re entirely to blame or that you’re barred from receiving compensation. In fact, the law considers a range of factors, including the actions of both drivers, the circumstances leading up to the crash, and how a jury might perceive the situation.
Here’s how our car accident lawyers explain how you can still recover damages even if you were speeding:
The Role of Fault in Car Accident Cases
The real question that you have to ask is if this were to go to a jury, if you just go to random eight people on the street and you were to tell them all the facts, who would they find more at fault? Most of the time, they’re going to find at fault the person who was cutting off the other person–the person who pulled out. They may find some amount of negligence on the part of the person who was speeding. Let’s say that the person who was speeding has a $100 claim, was 20% at fault because he was speeding. Then any sort of award or settlement would probably be reduced by 20%: the amount that person was at fault.
A Reverse Case: Speeding and Liability
While the majority of cases involve one party clearly at fault, there are exceptions that challenge conventional thinking. One notable example involved a driver who ran a red light and collided with a police vehicle. At first glance, most people would agree that the driver running the red light was primarily at fault. However, there was a twist: the police officer was also speeding at the time of the collision. So this isn’t a case of “can I get compensation even though I was speeding?” it was “Is the speeding driver at fault for the car crash?”
The injured driver filed a lawsuit, arguing that the police officer’s excessive speed contributed to the accident, and therefore the red-light runner was owed some compensation for their injuries. The judge dismissed the case, saying that it was the red-light runner who was completely at fault. But that wasn’t the end! The case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court, where the justices determined that fault wasn’t so straightforward. They ruled that the case couldn’t simply be dismissed by blaming the red-light runner entirely. Instead, a jury needed to consider the speeding officer’s role in the collision and decide how much fault, if any, should be assigned to them.
This case highlights a critical point: accidents often involve shared responsibility. Even when one party’s actions seem blatantly wrong—such as running a red light—other factors, like speeding, can complicate the picture. Ultimately, it’s up to a jury to weigh the evidence, apply common sense, and determine a fair allocation of fault.
What Happens When Fault is Shared?
In Nevada, this is where the state’s modified comparative negligence law comes into play. Under this law, you can recover damages as long as you are not more than 50% at fault for the accident. If a jury determines that fault is shared equally—50% for each party—then the injured party can still recover damages. However, the total amount of compensation they receive will be reduced by their percentage of fault. For instance, if your total damages are $10,000, and you are found to be 50% at fault, you would only recover $5,000.
But if the jury finds that the injured party is more than 50% at fault—say, 51%—then Nevada law bars them from recovering any damages. This threshold emphasizes the importance of presenting a strong case to demonstrate that your level of fault does not exceed the other party’s.
In the end, fault and compensation are deeply intertwined. That’s why understanding the nuances of Nevada’s laws and gathering solid evidence to support your case are crucial steps in protecting your rights. If you have questions about your situation, don’t hesitate to reach out. We’re here to help.
