Answer: If a motorcyclist is somewhat at fault for a crash, there is certainly still the possibility of a strong and winning case.
This question pertains to Nevada’s comparative negligence law (NRS 41.141). As long as a plaintiff is not 51 percent or more negligent, then the plaintiff is still allowed to recover damages under the law. However, the damages award will be reduced by the plaintiff’s proportion of the negligence. For example, if a motorcyclist was weaving between lanes or speeding when he was struck by a drunk driver, the court might determine that the motorcyclist was 20 percent to blame but that the drunk driver bears 80 percent of the blame for the crash. In this scenario, the motorcyclist could still recover damages, but his damages award would be reduced by 20 percent. To show you how this would work, imagine that the motorcyclist was awarded $100,000 in damages. Since the plaintiff was 20 percent negligent, that award would be reduced by 20 percent, or $20,000, and he would recover $80,000.
Motorcycle accident claims are not treated any differently than other motor vehicle collisions when it comes to comparative negligence and damages awards. If anything, juries recognize that motorists owe a duty to motorcyclists to share the road.