Partially at Fault in a Car Accident? Arizona’s Comparative Negligence Rule

The rule

Under A.R.S. § 12-2505, a claimant’s fault proportionally reduces the recovery but does not bar it. Arizona is one of the minority of "pure" comparative fault states: even a person found 90% at fault can recover the remaining 10%. The only statutory exception is a claimant who intentionally caused or contributed to their own injury. Arizona has also abolished most joint liability — under A.R.S. § 12-2506 each defendant generally pays only their own percentage.

The math, concretely

If your damages are $100,000 and the jury assigns you 30% of the fault, you recover $70,000. Fault percentages are decided by the jury at trial — which means that in settlement negotiation, they are decided by what each side can prove a jury would likely find. Percentage points are dollars: moving an allocation from 40% to 20% doubles nothing abstract — it is real money.

How insurers use it

Because every point of fault shifted onto you cuts what the insurer pays, fault-shifting is a standard adjuster tactic: you were speeding, you braked late, you could have avoided it. This is why recorded statements to the other driver’s insurer are risky — casual phrasing ("I didn’t see him until the last second") becomes a comparative fault argument. The counter is evidence: scene photographs, vehicle damage patterns, witness statements, and where needed, accident reconstruction.

What this means for your claim

Never assume a crash that was partly your fault is not worth pursuing — with serious injuries, even a reduced recovery can be substantial, and the at-fault percentage itself is negotiable ground where representation earns its keep. The basics of the claim process are on the Phoenix car accident page, and the settlement timeline guide covers what happens when.