The 51% Modified Comparative Negligence Rule in Massachusetts Motorcycle Accidents
Massachusetts follows a 51% modified comparative negligence rule. If an insurance adjuster or jury determines that you, the motorcyclist, were 51% or more at fault for the crash, you are legally barred from recovering a single penny in compensation.
Insurance adjusters harbor a deep-seated bias against motorcycle riders. When an accident occurs, the opposing insurance company will automatically look for ways to blame you, assuming you were riding recklessly or speeding. In this state, shifting blame onto the victim is a highly effective defense strategy because of a strict legal threshold. To fight back against these aggressive tactics and protect your right to compensation, you should use our United States lawyer directory to hire a local attorney immediately.
How the 51% Modified Comparative Negligence Rule Works
Under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231, § 85, the state utilizes a modified comparative negligence system. This law dictates that a plaintiff's damages must be reduced by their percentage of fault. For example, if you are awarded $100,000 for your injuries but are found to be 20% at fault, you will only receive $80,000. However, the law contains a harsh cutoff: if you are found to be greater than 50% at fault (meaning 51% or higher), you are completely barred from any financial recovery. Insurance adjusters know this, and their primary goal is to push your perceived fault over that 50% mark.
Speeding Allegations
The most common tactic used by defense attorneys is alleging that the motorcycle was speeding. Even if a car turned directly in front of you, the defense will argue that if you had been traveling at the posted speed limit, the crash would not have happened, or the impact would have been less severe. They will point to long skid marks, the distance your bike was thrown, or the severity of the damage to estimate your speed.
To counter this, your attorney may need to hire an accident reconstructionist. This expert will analyze the police Form CRA-23, Massachusetts, Registry of Motor Vehicles, Motor Vehicle Crash Operator Report, measure yaw marks on the pavement, and retrieve data from vehicle event data recorders to scientifically prove you were traveling at a safe speed.
Improper Lane Positioning
Adjusters frequently claim that the rider was in a blind spot or was maneuvering illegally. It is critical to understand that under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 89, § 4A, lane splitting (riding between lanes of stopped or slow-moving traffic) is strictly illegal in this state. If the defense can prove you were lane splitting at the time of the crash, they will aggressively argue that you were 51% or more at fault, completely destroying your claim.
Even if you were not lane splitting, they might argue you "weaved" within your own lane. Massachusetts courts, reflecting precedents seen in cases like Zeller v. Cantu, 395 Mass. 76 (MA Supreme Judicial Court 1985), closely examine the actions of both drivers. You must have witness statements or dashcam footage to prove you maintained a safe, predictable lane position prior to the collision.
Failing to Evasive Maneuver
Another frustrating defense is the "failure to take evasive action" argument. The adjuster will claim that even though their driver pulled out of a driveway illegally, you had enough time to swerve or brake, but failed to do so. They unfairly hold motorcyclists to the standard of professional stunt riders, ignoring the reality of reaction times and the danger of locking up motorcycle brakes.
Your lawyer will argue that the sudden emergency doctrine applies. When you are thrust into a sudden and unexpected dangerous situation created by the other driver, you are not expected to react perfectly; you are only expected to act as a reasonable person would in that split second of terror.
The Role of the Jury in Determining Fault
If the insurance company refuses to offer a fair settlement because they claim you were 51% at fault, your attorney will have to file a lawsuit in the local civil court, such as the Middlesex County Superior Court, Woburn or the Essex County Superior Court, Salem. Ultimately, if the case goes to trial, a jury of your peers will decide your exact percentage of fault. A skilled trial lawyer will present evidence showing that the inattentive car driver bears the vast majority, if not all, of the responsibility.
Examples of Payout Reductions
Understanding how the math works is vital for evaluating settlement offers.
| $200,000 | 0% Fault | $200,000 |
| $200,000 | 25% Fault | $150,000 |
| $200,000 | 50% Fault | $100,000 |
| $200,000 | 51% Fault | $0 (Total Bar) |
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What happens if the police report says I was at fault?
The police report is not the final word, and police officers are sometimes biased against bikers. An attorney can hire experts to challenge the police officer's conclusions and prove the other driver was actually liable.
Can I still get a settlement if I was 49% at fault?
Yes. As long as your fault is 50% or less, you can recover damages, but your final settlement or jury award will be reduced by your exact percentage of fault.
Is lane filtering legal if traffic is completely stopped?
No. Under state law, any form of lane splitting or filtering is illegal, even if traffic is completely gridlocked. Doing so can seriously jeopardize your injury claim.
How does the insurance company decide my fault percentage?
Adjusters use their own internal metrics based on witness statements, property damage, and police reports. They will purposefully inflate your fault to save the company money.
Do I have to give a recorded statement to the other driver's insurance?
No. You are not legally obligated to give a recorded statement to the opposing insurance company, and doing so often gives them ammunition to increase your fault percentage. Let your lawyer speak for you.
No reviews yet. Be the first to share your experience!