Pure Comparative Negligence in Missouri

Posted on

Almost all auto collisions have at least one negligent party involved. It is incredibly rare for an accident to be unavoidable, such as a loose rock tumbling down from the steep embankment or a deer running out into the road. Even if neither of the parties involved in the collision were driving in a negligent manner and the collision was caused by a set of faulty brakes, the car manufacturer would be held liable. As you can see, in most scenarios, someone is to blame. And, like many other states, Missouri distributes that negligence to one, both, or multiple other parties involved in a collision. Missouri is a pure comparative negligence state, which means that negligence can be thought of as a shared percentage.

 

Examples of Pure Comparative Negligence

 

For an example of an auto crash that two parties would most likely be found negligent, imagine a collision that occurs at an intersection where one party went through a red light and the other was speeding excessively through their green light. In this case, the party that went through the red light would most likely receive the highest percentage of negligence, we’ll say 90 percent. That would leave the other party with 10 percent of the blame (10 percent negligent). Because the party that went through the red light was more at fault, the party that was speeding will be able to claim compensation, but only 90 percent of their damages, not 100 percent.

 

Two Fatalities Following January Collision on Interstate 44

 

In January, 2016, a fatal collision occurred on Interstate 44 when an eastbound tractor-trailer pulled out of a rest area on ramp, according to KMOV News. A passenger vehicle approached from behind and slammed into the back of the semi truck. Both occupants of the passenger vehicle died. According to the truck driver, and other drivers, the on ramp is dangerous in design. Because of its short length, it is difficult to get up to speed in time to merge onto the freeway. In this scenario, there are three factors that could affect negligence. If the passenger vehicle was speeding, which is not known at the time of this writing, they could be held negligent to some degree. If the truck driver did not yield appropriately to the passenger vehicle, the truck driver could be held liable. If both of these scenarios were at play, liability could be divided between the two parties. Thirdly, if the on ramp was, in fact, found to be designed poorly, that could also affect how negligence is ascribed. Traffic accidents are almost always more complex than they appear on the surface, especially in Missouri with its pure comparative liability laws. In any situation where you or a loved one sustain injury in a car accident that you did not cause, it is important to hire an experienced attorney to guarantee the maximum compensation that you and your family deserve. If you have been injured in an accident, contact an experienced Kansas City car accident attorney today for a free consultation with the Krause & Kinsman Law Firm.

Our Reputation

The Krause & Kinsman Law Firm is made up of some of the nation’s foremost legal minds in the mass-tort field. That’s why our clients & co-counsel partners choose us.

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, and Co-Chair of the Law & Briefing Committee in MDL 2846:

In Re: Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc., Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in MDL 2974:

In Re: Paragard IUD Products Liability Litigation

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in MDL 2924:

In Re: Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation

Along with the aforementioned MDLs,

Plaintiff’s Counsel has prosecuted thousands of cases across other Multi-District Litigations and Mass-Torts, including:

MDL No. 3043:

Acetaminophen ASD/ADHD Product Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2753:

Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2782:

Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation

MCL No. 627:

In Re: Physiomesh Litigation, MCL

MCL No. 633:

In Re: Prolene Hernia System Mesh Litigation

MDL No. 2750:

Cook Medical, Inc., IVC Filters Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2641:

Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2326:

In Re: Boston Scientific Corp. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2606:

Benicar (Olmesartan) Product Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2666:

In Re: Forced Air Warming Devices Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2591:

Syngenta AG MIR162 Corn Litigation

MDL No. 2936:

In Re: Smity’s/CAM2303 Tractor Hydraulic Fluid Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation

MCL No. 630:

In Re: Proceed Mesh Litigation

MDL No. 2543:

In Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation

MDL No. 2004:

In Re: Mentor Corp. ObTape Transobturator Sling Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2187:

In Re: C. R. Bard, Inc. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2325:

In Re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2327:

In Re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 2387:

In Re: Coloplast Corp. Pelvic Support Systems Products Liability Litigation

MDL No. 251:

In Re: Neomedic Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation

Highly Awarded Trial Attorneys

The Krause & Kinsman Law Firm is one of the nation’s leading mass-tort & personal-injury law firms. The founding partners, Adam & Robert, have been selected to serve on steering committees for some of the largest pharmaceutical mass-tort cases.

Working With Us

Partnering with Krause & Kinsman is easy. When you partner with Krause & Kinsman, you can be sure that our mutual clients’ complex matters are handled with the utmost care and dedication. In addition to our top-notch representation, we will ensure our mutual clients receive frequent communication about the status of their cases.

Partner With Us

Why Us?

Recognized leaders in mass-torts with vast experience in complex litigation.

Your clients will appreciate the high-quality representation provided.

Your clients will consistently real-time updates on the status of their case via video, email, text, and phone.

Get real-time updates on the status of our mutual clients while their cases progress.

Collaborate on the case together and receive co-counsel fees.