A personal injury claim can still be filed in Connecticuteven when the claimant shares some responsibility for the accident. However, the state follows a modified comparative negligence system under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-572h, which allows recovery only up to a defined threshold and bars it once that threshold is exceeded.
This framework directly affects how a claim is evaluated and negotiated. Each percentage of fault assigned to the claimant reduces the total recovery, and exceeding the threshold eliminates the ability to recover damages altogether. Below are the key principles to understand about partial fault and comparative negligence in a Connecticut personal injury claim.
Connecticut Uses the 51% Bar Rule
Connecticut follows a modified comparative negligence rule that allows a claimant to recover damages as long as their share of fault does not exceed 50%. If the claimant is found to be 51% or more at fault, recovery is barred entirely, regardless of the severity of the injuries.
This threshold distinguishes Connecticut from pure comparative fault states, where recovery may still be available even when the claimant bears most of the fault. The 51% cutoff makes fault allocation a central issue in many cases.
English 
Spanish 
Compensation Is Reduced by Your Percentage of Fault
When the claimant’s fault remains at or below 50%, total damages are calculated first, and the claimant’s percentage of fault is then deducted to determine the final recovery.
For example:
• 10% at fault on a $100,000 claim results in $90,000 in recovery
• 30% at fault on a $100,000 claim results in $70,000 in recovery
• 50% at fault on a $100,000 claim results in $50,000 in recovery
• 51% at fault on a $100,000 claim results in no recovery
Because recovery is completely barred at 51%, disputes near that threshold often determine whether a claim has value at all.
The Rule Applies Across Personal Injury Cases
Modified comparative negligence applies broadly to personal injury claims in Connecticut, including vehicle accidents, slip and fall cases, and other premises liability matters. The same threshold and proportional reduction framework apply across these categories.
This means the analysis of fault remains consistent regardless of the type of claim, with liability allocation playing a central role in determining the outcome.
Insurance Companies Push to Maximize Claimant Fault
Because each percentage of fault assigned to the claimant reduces the insurer’s payout, insurers often look for arguments that increase the claimant’s share of responsibility. Factors such as inattention, delayed reaction, or disputed decisions leading up to the accident may be used to support these arguments.
This pressure can be especially pronounced near the 51% threshold, where a slight shift in fault allocation can eliminate recovery entirely. How fault is documented early in the process often plays a key role in how these arguments are evaluated.
The Burden of Proof Affects How Fault Is Assigned
In a personal injury case, the claimant generally bears the burden of proving the defendant’s negligence, while the defendant typically bears the burden of establishing any comparative negligence by the claimant.
Although both sides usually present evidence on fault, this distinction influences how the case is developed. The defense must provide evidence that supports a finding of comparative fault, rather than relying on speculation.
Multiple Defendants Change the Calculation
When more than one party is responsible for an accident, Connecticut’s apportionment rules determine how fault is divided. Each defendant is typically responsible for paying damages in proportion to their percentage of fault, subject to certain exceptions.
These cases often involve more complex analysis, as fault must be allocated among multiple parties and their respective roles in the incident.
The Two-Year Statute of Limitations Applies Either Way
Connecticut’s two-year statute of limitations under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-584 applies to personal injury claims regardless of comparative fault. The deadline generally runs from the date of injury, and missing it prevents the claim from being filed.
Comparative fault disputes can extend negotiations, but the filing deadline remains fixed. Even when discussions are ongoing, failing to file within the statutory period can eliminate the ability to pursue the claim.
How Connecticut’s Modified Comparative Fault Rule Affects Bridgeport Personal Injury Claims
The principles above each affect a different aspect of how comparative fault operates in a claim, from the initial liability assessment through the final settlement. The table below summarizes how each principle influences the outcome.
| Principle | How It Affects the Claim |
| The 51% bar rule | Recovery is eliminated once fault exceeds 50% |
| Compensation reduced by fault percentage | Each percentage point of fault reduces the recoverable compensation |
| Rule applies across personal injury cases | Covers car accidents, motorcycle crashes, slip and falls, and premises liability claims |
| Insurer push to maximize claimant fault | Often becomes especially intense near the 51% threshold |
| Burden of proof on comparative negligence | The defendant typically must prove the claimant’s share of fault |
| Multiple defendants change the calculation | Apportionment rules determine how fault is divided among multiple parties |
| Two-year statute of limitations | The filing deadline continues to run regardless of ongoing fault disputes |
A key feature of this framework is the 51% threshold, which separates cases where recovery is possible from those where it is barred entirely.
Disputes over fault allocation—particularly near that threshold—can have a significant impact on the outcome. As a result, the evidence used to establish liability plays a central role throughout the claim.
Partially at Fault for a Bridgeport Accident? Welcome Law Firm Can Help
If you were partially at fault in a Bridgeport accident and want to understand how Connecticut’s comparative negligence rule affects your right to recover, the right legal guidance can change how the case develops. Welcome Law Firm represents personal injury clients across Connecticut and knows how to push back when insurers try to inflate fault percentages.
Contact our Bridgeport office to discuss the details of your case and what the comparative fault analysis may mean for your recovery.
