After a crash, both drivers may believe the other one is to blame. Insurers know this and look for any way to shift part of the responsibility onto the injured person. South Dakota has a specific rule on that question.
South Dakota Uses a Slight-Fault Standard
Under South Dakota Codified Laws section 20-9-2, a plaintiff’s contributory negligence does not bar recovery in an injury or property damage case if that negligence was slight compared with the negligence of the defendant. When the standard is met, the damages are reduced in proportion to the plaintiff’s own negligence.
The result is that a small share of fault reduces a claim but does not end it. A larger share of fault can end it entirely.
Slight Is Judged Case by Case
The statute does not set a percentage. Whether fault is slight in comparison depends on the full set of facts, including what each person did, what each person should have done, and how the collision unfolded. That is why the account of the crash given in the first days matters so much.
Some people assume any shared fault means they recover nothing, which is one of the myths about injury claims that lead people to drop valid claims too early.
An injured person should avoid guessing about fault when talking with an adjuster. A casual remark such as “I might have been going a little fast” can be used later to argue that the standard has not been met.
How Insurers Raise the Argument
Adjusters may not say outright that they are building a comparison case. They can ask questions that point toward the injured person’s conduct. Common lines of questioning involve:
- Speed and following distance before the impact
- Whether the injured person was using a phone or was otherwise distracted
- Whether a turn signal, light, or other warning was working
- Whether the injured person could have braked or steered to avoid the crash
Collisions on Mitchell Roads
Fault disputes show up in many kinds of collisions. A Mitchell car accident can involve two drivers whose accounts differ, and the physical evidence can decide whose version holds up.
Cyclists face a particular version of the problem, since a driver may claim never to have seen the rider. A Mitchell bicycle accident claim can depend on the rider’s lighting, position on the road, and the driver’s line of sight.
Evidence That Answers a Fault Argument
Strong evidence limits how much blame can be assigned. Useful items include:
- Photographs of the vehicles, the road, and any skid marks
- Names and numbers for witnesses
- The police report and any citations
- Video from nearby businesses or from a dashboard camera
A Mitchell personal injury lawyer can compare an insurer’s questions against that evidence before any recorded statement is given.
Damages Are Reduced, Not Erased, When Fault Is Slight
If the injured person meets the standard, the recovery is lowered by that person’s share. A claim with significant losses can still be valuable after a reduction, which is one reason it should not be dropped at the first mention of shared fault.
The categories of potential damages in injury claims include medical costs, lost income, and pain and suffering, and each one is affected by the allocation of fault.
Getting a Careful Review
Whether an insurer’s fault argument is likely to hold depends on the evidence gathered in the first weeks after the crash, and a Mitchell personal injury lawyer can measure it against the police report and scene photographs.
The same comparison applies across South Dakota motor vehicle accident claims, whether the other party was a driver, a cyclist, or a commercial carrier.
Experience With Injury Claims
Loos, Sabers & Smith, LLP represents injured people in South Dakota alongside its family law, business litigation, and criminal defense work. Partner Michael C. Loos has practiced law since 1994 and was selected to Super Lawyers for personal injury from 2017 through 2025.
Insurers can settle on a version of events early, so anyone hurt in a crash in Mitchell may want to reach out to the firm while the facts are fresh.