Fault & Liability Questions & Answers

Direct answer

Fault is determined from the available evidence — the police report, witness statements, physical damage, vehicle data, traffic-control timing, and sometimes reconstruction analysis. Each driver’s duties — right-of-way, following distance, signal use, speed — are evaluated against what happened. Fault is not assumed; it is established from the facts.

Direct answer

You may still have a claim. Missouri applies a pure comparative fault approach, meaning your recovery may be reduced by your assigned percentage of fault rather than barred entirely. A person 30% at fault may recover 70% of their damages. The practical effect depends on how fault is apportioned from the evidence.

Direct answer

Comparative fault is a framework that assigns each party a percentage of responsibility for an accident and reduces an injured person’s recovery by their assigned percentage. Missouri uses a pure comparative fault model, allowing recovery at any fault level with a proportional reduction. The terms comparative fault and comparative negligence are often used interchangeably.

Direct answer

Yes. Real accidents often have multiple contributing causes, and fault can be apportioned among several parties under Missouri’s comparative fault approach. In a multi-vehicle crash, several drivers may each bear a percentage. Identifying all potentially responsible parties early matters for both liability and coverage.

Direct answer

A company may be responsible for an employee’s driving in some circumstances, based on the employment relationship and whether the employee was acting within the scope of employment. It should not be assumed that an employer is responsible in every situation. The specific facts — ownership, job duties, and what the driver was doing — determine it.

Direct answer

In some circumstances, yes. A vehicle owner may bear responsibility depending on the facts and applicable Missouri law — for example, where they knowingly lent the vehicle to an unsafe driver, or where ownership and operation create responsibility under specific rules. Whether an owner is responsible is a fact-specific question.

Direct answer

A defective component — brakes, tires, steering, or another part — may have contributed to a crash, and the manufacturer or another party in the supply chain may bear responsibility in some circumstances. Whether a defect was involved and who is responsible are factual questions examined through the vehicle, the records, and sometimes expert analysis.

Direct answer

Poorly maintained vehicles or equipment can contribute to a crash — worn brakes, bald tires, or faulty lighting. A party responsible for maintenance — the owner, a fleet operator, or a repair vendor — may bear responsibility depending on the facts. Maintenance and inspection records help establish what was known and when.

Direct answer

The police report, witness statements, photographs of the scene and damage, vehicle event data recorder information, dashcam or nearby video, signal-timing records, and sometimes accident reconstruction. Negligence is shown by establishing that a party failed to exercise reasonable care and that the failure caused the harm. Evidence preserved early is the hardest to reconstruct later.