If you only remember one point about being sued after a car accident in Louisiana, remember this: Louisiana uses pure comparative fault under Civ. Code art. 2323: each party's fault reduces recovery proportionally without a complete bar at 50% or 51%. Multiple defendants' fault is allocated separately. Procedure, examples, and the opinions below hang off La. Civ. Code art. 2323. The personal-injury deadline is 1 year — La. Civ. Code art. 3492. Louisiana is an at-fault liability state with compulsory minimum bodily-injury coverage; there is no broad no-fault tort immunity for car-accident claims.
Insurance: at-fault, PIP, and no-fault thresholds
Louisiana is an at-fault liability state with compulsory minimum bodily-injury coverage; there is no broad no-fault tort immunity for car-accident claims.
First-party benefits (PIP / MedPay) do not always eliminate a tort suit. Where Louisiana uses a no-fault threshold, confirm whether your injuries meet the statutory trigger before assuming a lawsuit is barred or available.
Walking through Louisiana facts
Use this walkthrough to see which Louisiana authority does the work at each step.
Two drivers collide in Louisiana. Each claims the other was negligent, and one was partly at fault.
- Identify the fault system: In Louisiana, you can still recover even if you were mostly at fault — your damages are simply reduced by your percentage of fault. There is no 50% or 51% cutoff..
- Apply what fault does to the claim: Louisiana uses pure comparative fault under Civ. Code art. 2323: each party's fault reduces recovery proportionally without a complete bar at 50% or 51%. Multiple defendants' fault is allocated separately.
- Calendar the lawsuit deadline: 1 year — La. Civ. Code art. 3492.
- Separate insurance coverage from whether a tort claim exists: Louisiana is an at-fault liability state with compulsory minimum bodily-injury coverage; there is no broad no-fault tort immunity for car-accident claims.
In Louisiana the accident lawsuit turns on La. Civ. Code art. 2323 and the pure comparative rule, not on a national no-fault script.
Deadline to sue (statute of limitations)
1 year — La. Civ. Code art. 3492
Missing the deadline usually ends the claim permanently. Tolling (minority, discovery rules, bankruptcy stays) can apply in narrow situations — do not assume extra time without counsel.
What to do after a crash in Louisiana
- Get medical care and document injuries.
- Preserve photos, dash-cam, witness names, and the police report.
- Notify your insurer promptly; avoid recorded statements to the other driver’s insurer without advice.
- Calendar the SOL: 1 year — La. Civ. Code art. 3492.
- Use LawDiver’s LawDiver rail (scoped to Louisiana) to research comparative/contributory negligence opinions before negotiating.
Case law: fault and auto accidents in Louisiana
Bell v. Jet Wheel Blast, Div. of Ervin Industries
Bell v. Jet Wheel Blast, Div. of Ervin Industries, 1985 La. LEXIS 7832 (1985)
…re called upon to decide whether contributory negligence or comparative fault applies in strict products liability cases. This question of law was certified to us by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 717 F.2d 181 (1983), granting rehearing 709 F.2d 6 (1983), pursuant to La.R.S. 13:72.1 (1972) and Rule 12, Rules of the Supreme Court of Louisiana (1973). W…
Louisiana opinions such as Bell v. Jet Wheel Blast, Div. of Ervin Industries are cited where car-accident / fault is disputed. The court stated: "This question of law was certified to us by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 717 F.2d 181 (1983), granting rehearing 709 F.2d 6 (1983), pursuant to La.R.S. 13:72.1 (1972) and Rule 12, Rules of the Supreme Court of Louisiana (1973)." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc.
Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., 476 So. 2d 800 (1985)
…0 (La.1978) was affected by the adoption of the doctrine of comparative negligence by the Louisiana legislature.[1] Musette Turner was injured in the neutral ground on Canal Street where she was rushing to transfer from one bus to another, but was run over by a third bus. The trial court found Mrs. Turner negligent, held that the Baumgartner case applied, and awarded plaintiff…
Louisiana opinions such as Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. are cited where car-accident / fault is disputed. The court stated: "La.1978) was affected by the adoption of the doctrine of comparative negligence by the Louisiana legislature.[1] Musette Turner was injured in the neutral ground on Canal Street where she was rushing to transfer from one bus to another, but was run over by a third bus." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Thomas v. Hartford Ins. Co.
Thomas v. Hartford Ins. Co., 540 So. 2d 1068 (1989)
…A SPOUSE'S LOSS OF CONSORTIUM AWARD FOR THE OTHER SPOUSE'S COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE (Thomas Assignment of Error No. 7) Mrs. Thomas contends the trial court committed error for reduction of her loss of consortium award. By Acts 1982, No. 202, La.C.C. art. 2315 was amended to read as follows: Damages may include loss of consortium, service, and society, and shall be recoverable by…
Thomas v. Hartford Ins. Co. is worth reading on Louisiana car-accident / fault because the court put the point in its own words: "A SPOUSE'S LOSS OF CONSORTIUM AWARD FOR THE OTHER SPOUSE'S COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE (Thomas Assignment of Error No. 7) Mrs. Thomas contends the trial court committed error for reduction of her loss of consortium award. By Acts 1982, No. 202, La.C.C. art." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
FRAIN AS TUTRIX OF BEASON v. State Farm Ins. Co.
FRAIN AS TUTRIX OF BEASON v. State Farm Ins. Co., 421 So. 2d 1169 (1982)
…plaintiff here contends that Act 431 of 1979 which returned comparative negligence to our legal system legislatively overruled Callais and Olinde. Recall that the plaintiff herein alleges both the negligence of this decedent as well as the negligence of the defendant who loaned the vehicle. Thus the plaintiff asserts that as a result of Act 431 of 1979 plaintiff should recover,…
On car-accident / fault, FRAIN AS TUTRIX OF BEASON v. State Farm Ins. Co. speaks to the Louisiana dispute in this passage: "Act 431 of 1979 which returned comparative negligence to our legal system legislatively overruled Callais and Olinde. Recall that the plaintiff herein alleges both the negligence of this decedent as well as the negligence of the defendant who loaned the vehicle." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc.
Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc., 471 So. 2d 709 (1985)
…0 (La.1978) was affected by the adoption of the doctrine of comparative negligence by the Louisiana legislature.[1] *711 Musette Turner was injured in the neutral ground on Canal Street where she was rushing to transfer from one bus to another, but was run over by a third bus. The trial court found Mrs. Turner negligent, held that the Baumgartner case applied, and awarded plain…
Practitioners open Turner v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. when Louisiana car-accident / fault turns on the distinction in this sentence: "La.1978) was affected by the adoption of the doctrine of comparative negligence by the Louisiana legislature.[1] *711 Musette Turner was injured in the neutral ground on Canal Street where she was rushing to transfer from one bus to another, but was run over by a third bus." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Harper v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
Harper v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 1986 La. App. LEXIS 6193 (1986)
…ff appeals asserting that the trial court erred in applying comparative negligence and in finding that plaintiff's actions were victim fault or contributory negligence. State Farm also appeals alleging that the trial court erred in not allowing State Farm to introduce the battery in evidence, and for casting them for 100% of costs. The essence of plaintiff's argument is that th…
Louisiana opinions such as Harper v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. are cited where car-accident / fault is disputed. The court stated: "State Farm also appeals alleging that the trial court erred in not allowing State Farm to introduce the battery in evidence, and for casting them for 100% of costs." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Hayes v. STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF TRANSPORT AND DEVELOPMENT
Hayes v. STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF TRANSPORT AND DEVELOPMENT, 467 So. 2d 604 (1985)
…ute victim fault, the trial court erred in failing to apply comparative negligence. We affirm in part, reverse in part and amend the judgment. FACTS On May 22, 1981, at approximately 7:30 a.m. in Lafayette Parish, Hayes, while on her way to work, was taking her two young children to the babysitter. At the time of the accident, Hayes was 26 years of age. She was driving a four-w…
Louisiana opinions such as Hayes v. STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF TRANSPORT AND DEVELOPMENT are cited where car-accident / fault is disputed. The court stated: "We affirm in part, reverse in part and amend the judgment. FACTS On May 22, 1981, at approximately 7:30 a.m. in Lafayette Parish, Hayes, while on her way to work, was taking her two young children to the babysitter. At the time of the accident, Hayes was 26 years of age." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Price v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co.
Price v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 457 So. 2d 722 (1984)
…errogatories, after being properly instructed on the law of comparative negligence. 1. Mr. Boleware was guilty of fault or negligence which was the proximate cause of damage to Mr. Price and the plaintiff. The degree of fault was 5%. 2. Jesse Price was also guilty of fault or negligence which was the proximate cause of damages to himself and plaintiff. The degree of that fault…
On car-accident / fault, Price v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. speaks to the Louisiana dispute in this passage: "Mr. Boleware was guilty of fault or negligence which was the proximate cause of damage to Mr. Price and the plaintiff. The degree of fault was 5%. 2. Jesse Price was also guilty of fault or negligence which was the proximate cause of damages to himself and plaintiff." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Key takeaways
- Fault system: pure comparative fault (recovery reduced by your share of fault, with no percentage bar).
- Controlling authority: La. Civ. Code art. 2323.
- In Louisiana, you can still recover even if you were mostly at fault — your damages are simply reduced by your percentage of fault. There is no 50% or 51% cutoff.
- Personal-injury filing deadline: 1 year — La. Civ. Code art. 3492.
- Insurance: Louisiana is an at-fault liability state with compulsory minimum bodily-injury coverage; there is no broad no-fault tort immunity for car-accident claims.
Can you be sued after a car accident in Louisiana?
Yes. A driver, passenger, pedestrian, or property owner injured in a crash can file a negligence (or related) claim against an allegedly at-fault driver — and against owners or employers in some agency/vicarious-liability settings. Being “mostly not at fault” does not stop a lawsuit from being filed; it shapes whether the plaintiff can win and how much they recover.
You can also be sued even when you believe the other driver is primarily responsible. Fault is usually a contested jury (or settlement) issue under La. Civ. Code art. 2323.
Comparative fault and negligence in Louisiana
Louisiana uses pure comparative fault under Civ. Code art. 2323: each party's fault reduces recovery proportionally without a complete bar at 50% or 51%. Multiple defendants' fault is allocated separately.
In Louisiana, you can still recover even if you were mostly at fault — your damages are simply reduced by your percentage of fault. There is no 50% or 51% cutoff.
Practical consequences:
- Settlement leverage tracks predicted fault shares.
- Insurers often reserve rights or deny coverage based on comparative-fault findings.
- Multiple defendants (other drivers, employers, vehicle owners) can split fault among themselves under Louisiana allocation rules.
Frequently asked questions
Can I get sued if the accident was not my fault?
Anyone can file a suit. Winning — and collecting — depends on proving negligence and overcoming Louisiana’s pure comparative rules under La. Civ. Code art. 2323.
What if I was partly at fault?
In Louisiana, you can still recover even if you were mostly at fault — your damages are simply reduced by your percentage of fault. There is no 50% or 51% cutoff.
How long do I have to sue after a car accident in Louisiana?
1 year — La. Civ. Code art. 3492
Does insurance prevent a lawsuit?
Louisiana is an at-fault liability state with compulsory minimum bodily-injury coverage; there is no broad no-fault tort immunity for car-accident claims. Coverage disputes are separate from whether a tort claim exists.