Four systems, and Maine uses the stricter middle version
American fault law splits into four real categories: pure comparative negligence, modified comparative negligence with a 50% bar, modified comparative negligence with a 51% bar, and pure contributory negligence. Maine uses the 50% bar — the less common, stricter of the two modified thresholds nationally.
Maine's rule: barred at the exact midpoint
Under 14 M.R.S. § 156, a claimant found by the jury to be equally at fault — 50% — may not recover at all. A claimant at exactly 50% recovers nothing; only fault below that mark allows a reduced recovery.
Where Maine genuinely stands apart: jury discretion
Even among 50%-bar states, Maine's approach to the reduction itself is distinctive. Most comparative negligence states, whatever their threshold, apply a straightforward percentage reduction — 30% fault means a 30% cut in damages, full stop. Maine's statute instead directs the jury to reduce damages "to such extent as the jury thinks just and equitable having regard to the claimant's share in the responsibility," giving Maine juries real, acknowledged discretion rather than a purely mechanical formula.
The more forgiving alternative: a 51% bar
A larger group of about 21 states, including Connecticut and Illinois, use a more forgiving version: recovery is barred only when the claimant's fault actually exceeds the defendant's, not merely equals it. A claimant at exactly 50% still recovers a reduced amount in those states, while the same claimant recovers nothing at all in Maine.
Pure comparative and contributory negligence: the two extremes
At the more forgiving end of the spectrum, pure comparative negligence states like California never bar recovery for ordinary fault at all. At the far stricter end, the five contributory negligence jurisdictions — Alabama, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, and DC — bar recovery entirely for any fault, even 1%. See our guide to the other states using a 50% bar for Maine's closest peer group nationally.