New York’s New Fault-First Rule for Car Accident Claims

New York recently changed the way car accident injury cases are handled in court. Under a new law that took effect May 26, 2026, the question of who caused the accident must be decided before the question of whether the injured person suffered a “serious injury.” This change is referred to as New York’s new “fault-first” rule.

The new rule is part of a broader set of changes made this year to New York’s motor vehicle injury laws. The same legislation eliminated the 90/180-day category from the serious injury threshold and changed the state’s comparative negligence rules for covered motor vehicle cases.

For people injured in car accidents, the practical takeaway is straightforward: establishing fault has become even more important. If you are injured in a crash and the other driver claims you were partly responsible, the dispute over what actually happened can become the most important issue in your case.

At Dupée & Monroe, P.C., our Goshen personal injury attorneys represent car accident victims throughout Orange County and the Hudson Valley. As New York’s laws change, having an attorney who understands how to investigate and litigate liability disputes can be critical to protecting your ability to recover compensation.

What Does “Fault-First” Mean?

Before the new law, the issues in a motor vehicle injury case could be considered in a different order. Now, New York Insurance Law § 5104(a) specifically requires the trier of fact to determine who was at fault before determining whether the injured person suffered a serious injury.

In everyday terms, think of a car accident lawsuit as involving several basic questions. First, who caused the crash? Then, if the injured person is pursuing non-economic damages such as pain and suffering, does the injury meet New York’s serious injury threshold? The amount of damages can then be determined if the case proceeds to that stage.

The new law essentially puts the responsibility question first.

That may sound like just a technical, procedural change, but it can have significant practical consequences. The facts surrounding the accident, including which driver violated traffic laws and whether either driver contributed to the collision, may become the central focus of the first phase of a trial.

Why Did New York Make This Change?

The 2026 legislation made several changes to New York’s motor vehicle insurance and personal injury laws. The Department of Financial Services describes the amendments as part of reforms addressing motor vehicle insurance costs and claims practices.

The fault-first provision itself is relatively simple. In an action seeking non-economic (pain and suffering) damages under New York’s no-fault system, the jury or other trier of fact must determine the party or parties at fault before determining whether the plaintiff suffered a serious injury.

The change also fits with another important part of the new law: New York has moved away from its former pure comparative negligence approach for covered motor vehicle injury cases.

Under the new rule, an injured person’s fault can prevent recovery of non-economic damages if the injured person’s share of responsibility is greater than the responsibility of the defendant, or greater than the combined responsibility of the defendants being sued.

That makes the determination of fault especially important.

What Happens If Both Drivers Are Accused of Causing the Crash?

Consider a simple example.

Suppose Driver A runs a stop sign and hits Driver B’s vehicle. Driver B suffers significant injuries. Driver A’s insurance company, however, argues that Driver B was speeding and therefore shares responsibility for the accident.

Under the new law, the parties cannot simply skip over that dispute and immediately focus on whether Driver B’s injuries qualify as serious. The fault question comes first.

The jury may hear evidence about the traffic signal or stop sign, vehicle positions, photographs, surveillance footage, witness testimony, accident reconstruction, vehicle damage, and other evidence showing how the collision occurred.

The jury then decides who was responsible and to what extent.

That determination can have a major impact on the injured person’s ability to recover non-economic damages.

The Insurance Company Does Not Get to Decide Who Was at Fault

One point is particularly important for accident victims: an insurance company’s determination of fault is not the final legal determination of fault.

An insurance adjuster might investigate a collision and decide that its insured was not responsible—or that the injured person was partially responsible. That determination may affect settlement negotiations, but it does not prevent an injured person from presenting evidence that tells a different story.

If the parties cannot reach a settlement and the case goes to trial, the ultimate determination of fault is made by the jury, based on the evidence presented in court.

This distinction matters because insurance companies have a financial incentive to minimize the amount they pay on claims. An insurer may attempt to shift some or most of the blame onto the injured person. Under New York’s new motor vehicle rules, that argument can carry even greater consequences.

An experienced personal injury attorney can challenge an insurer’s version of events and develop evidence supporting the client’s position.

Why Evidence of the Accident Is So Important

The fault-first rule makes evidence concerning the accident itself particularly important.

For example, evidence may include photographs taken at the scene, damage to the vehicles, traffic-camera footage, surveillance video from nearby businesses, dashcam recordings, eyewitness testimony, police reports, cellphone evidence, and electronic data from the vehicles involved.

The physical evidence may help answer basic questions: Which vehicle had the right-of-way? Was someone speeding? Did a driver cross the center line? Was a driver changing lanes? Did someone fail to stop? Did road conditions contribute to the crash?

In more complicated accidents, an attorney may work with an accident reconstruction professional to analyze the available evidence and determine how the collision occurred.

This investigation can be particularly important when the other driver provides a version of events that conflicts with the evidence.

What Does the Rule Mean for Settlement Negotiations?

The new law does not mean every car accident case has to go to trial.

In fact, many personal injury cases are resolved through settlement. The fault-first rule can still have an important effect on negotiations because both sides know that liability will be a central issue if the case proceeds to court.

If an injured person’s attorney develops compelling evidence showing that the other driver caused the accident, that evidence can strengthen the injured person’s position during settlement negotiations.

Conversely, an insurance company that believes it can convince a jury that its insured was not responsible may be less willing to make a substantial settlement offer.

This is one reason it is important to prepare a car accident case as though it could eventually go to trial, even when the ultimate goal is to reach a negotiated settlement.

Why Legal Representation Is More Important Under the New Law

The new fault-first rule makes early investigation of a car accident particularly valuable.

An attorney can identify potential sources of evidence, preserve evidence before it disappears, interview witnesses while their recollections are fresh, obtain relevant records, and determine whether expert testimony could strengthen the case.

Legal representation is especially important when the other driver or the insurance company claims that the injured person contributed to the accident. What may initially seem like a minor allegation of shared fault could become a major issue under the new rules.

An attorney can also distinguish between what an insurance adjuster claims happened and what the available evidence actually shows.

New York’s Fault-First Rule Does Not Mean Every Injury Claim Is Lost

The new law does not mean that an accident victim automatically loses a claim whenever the other side alleges fault. The question is what the evidence ultimately establishes. For instance, a driver may be accused of speeding, failing to yield, following too closely, or making an unsafe maneuver. But an allegation is not the same thing as a finding of fault. If the parties disagree, the evidence must be evaluated, and a jury may ultimately determine responsibility.

This is particularly important in cases where the facts are disputed. A police report, an insurance company’s investigation, or the opposing driver’s statement does not necessarily tell the entire story.

How Dupée & Monroe, P.C. Can Help

New York’s new fault-first rule changes the way certain motor vehicle injury cases will proceed, making the evidence surrounding the accident more important than ever. For accident victims, the message is clear: do not assume that an insurance company’s assessment of fault is the final answer.

At Dupée & Monroe, P.C., we represent car accident victims throughout Orange County and the Hudson Valley. We understand the importance of investigating liability, gathering evidence, and challenging allegations that an injured client caused or contributed to a crash.

If you have been injured in a New York car accident, contact Dupée & Monroe, P.C. today for a free consultation. Our attorneys can evaluate the circumstances of your accident, explain how the new law may affect your claim, and work to protect your right to pursue the compensation you deserve.