Changes to New York Motor Vehicle Litigation Under the 2026 CPLR and Insurance Law Amendments – Part 1
For more than 50 years, New York followed a rule known as “pure comparative negligence.” Under that rule, an injured person could recover damages even if that person was mostly responsible for causing an accident. The recovery would simply be reduced according to the person’s percentage of fault.
That rule changed for certain New York motor-vehicle injury cases in May 2026.
Under the newly amended CPLR § 1411, an injured person can now be barred from recovering damages when his or her culpable conduct is greater than the fault of the person or combined fault of the people from whom recovery is sought.
Read CPLR § 1411 on the New York State Senate website
Key Takeaway
For motor-vehicle personal-injury actions subject to New York’s No-Fault Law and commenced on or after May 26, 2026, an injured plaintiff can now be barred from recovery if the plaintiff is more at fault than the defendant or defendants from whom recovery is sought.
In a typical case involving one plaintiff and one defendant, the difference between 50% and 51% fault can now be the difference between recovering damages and recovering nothing from that defendant.
How Did New York’s Comparative Negligence Law Work Before 2026?
Comparative negligence recognizes that more than one person can be responsible for causing an accident.
For example, one driver might make an unsafe left turn while another driver is speeding. A jury can decide that both drivers contributed to the collision and assign a percentage of fault to each.
For decades, New York followed pure comparative negligence. A plaintiff’s own negligence reduced the damages recoverable but generally did not completely prevent recovery.
A plaintiff found 30% responsible could still recover damages attributable to the defendant’s share of fault. Even a plaintiff found 75% responsible could potentially recover the portion attributable to someone else’s negligence.
The 2026 amendment changes that rule for covered motor-vehicle personal-injury actions. The secondary summary that prompted this article likewise identifies the amendment as New York’s shift from pure to modified comparative fault for these cases.
What Changed Under CPLR § 1411(b)?
The Legislature added a new subsection (b) to CPLR § 1411. It applies to personal-injury actions subject to Article 51 of the Insurance Law, New York’s motor-vehicle No-Fault framework.
The statute provides that a claimant’s culpable conduct “shall bar recovery” when it is greater than the culpable conduct of the person against whom recovery is sought, or greater than the combined culpable conduct of the persons against whom recovery is sought.
In a basic two-party case:
| Fault | Result Under Old Rule | Result Under New Rule |
|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff 30% / Defendant 70% | Plaintiff can recover | Plaintiff is not barred |
| Plaintiff 50% / Defendant 50% | Plaintiff can recover | Plaintiff is not barred |
| Plaintiff 51% / Defendant 49% | Plaintiff can recover | Plaintiff is BARRED |
This is often described as modified comparative negligence.
What Does This Mean in a Real New York Car Accident Case?
Consider a driver traveling through an intersection in Queens. An oncoming vehicle makes a left turn across the driver’s path, causing a collision. The turning driver argues that the injured driver was speeding and contributed to the accident.
If a jury finds the injured driver 40% at fault and the turning driver 60% at fault, the injured driver is not barred from recovery, although comparative fault can reduce the damages recoverable.
Now suppose the jury finds the injured driver 60% at fault and the turning driver 40% at fault.
Under New York’s former pure comparative-negligence rule, the injured driver could still potentially recover the portion of damages attributable to the other driver’s negligence. Under the new CPLR § 1411(b), the injured driver’s greater share of fault bars recovery from that defendant.
The percentage of fault can therefore determine not just how much an injured person recovers, but whether that person recovers at all.
What If More Than One Defendant Caused the Accident?
The statute contains an important rule for accidents involving multiple defendants: the plaintiff’s fault is compared with the combined culpable conduct of the persons against whom recovery is sought.
For example, if a plaintiff is 45% responsible, Driver A is 30% responsible, and Driver B is 25% responsible, the defendants’ combined fault is 55%. The plaintiff’s 45% share does not trigger the statutory bar.
This makes identifying every potentially responsible party particularly important in multi-vehicle collisions and other accidents involving multiple responsible parties.
Why Does the New Law Make Evidence of Fault More Important?
Fault has always mattered in motor-vehicle litigation, but the new law raises the stakes.
Surveillance and dashboard-camera footage, photographs, witnesses, vehicle damage, police records, electronic vehicle data and other evidence may help establish how a collision occurred. Some of that evidence can disappear quickly.
When the difference between 50% and 51% can potentially determine whether an injured person recovers from the other driver, promptly investigating an accident and preserving evidence can be critical.
When Does the New Law Apply?
The new rule does not apply to every personal-injury case in New York. CPLR § 1411(b) specifically applies to personal-injury actions subject to Article 51 of the Insurance Law. New York’s traditional comparative-negligence rule remains in CPLR § 1411(a) for other covered negligence actions.
The amendment took effect May 26, 2026, and applies to actions and proceedings commenced on or after that date. New York’s Department of Financial Services has confirmed that effective-date rule in its official guidance.
That means the date the lawsuit is commenced, not simply the date of the accident, can determine whether the new rule applies.
Read the New York Department of Financial Services guidance on the 2026 amendments
Does This Mean I Do Not Have a Case If I Was Partially at Fault?
No. Being partially responsible for an accident does not necessarily prevent an injured person from recovering.
An insurance company may claim that you were speeding, distracted, following too closely or otherwise contributed to a collision. That allegation does not establish your actual percentage of fault.
Video, witnesses, vehicle damage and other evidence may tell a different story. An injured person should therefore not assume there is no case simply because another driver or insurance company claims that person was partially responsible.
What Is Still Unclear?
CPLR § 1411(b) is new, and New York’s appellate courts have not yet had substantial opportunity to determine how the amendment will operate in practice.
Future decisions will likely provide additional guidance concerning issues such as multi-party cases, liability motions and trial procedure. This article will be updated as New York courts issue significant decisions interpreting the new law.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I recover if I was partly at fault?
Potentially, yes. Partial fault alone does not bar recovery. The new statutory bar applies when the claimant’s culpable conduct is greater than the defendant’s or the combined culpable conduct of the defendants from whom recovery is sought.
What happens if I am exactly 50% at fault?
In a basic two-party case, a 50/50 allocation does not trigger the bar because the plaintiff’s fault is not greater than the defendant’s.
What if my accident happened before May 26, 2026?
The new law applies to covered actions and proceedings commenced on or after May 26, 2026. Accordingly, an earlier accident may still be affected if the lawsuit was commenced after the effective date.
The Bottom Line
New York’s 2026 amendment to CPLR § 1411 significantly changes motor-vehicle accident litigation.
For covered cases, an injured person’s percentage of fault can now determine not only how much that person may recover, but whether that person can recover at all.
That makes promptly investigating a collision, preserving evidence and identifying all potentially responsible parties especially important.
If you were injured in a motor-vehicle accident in the five boroughs of New York City, Long Island, Westchester County or elsewhere in New York and have questions about how the 2026 changes may affect your rights, contact Leav & Steinberg, LLP at 212-766-5222 to discuss your case.