The more common modified comparative threshold
Among the US states that use some form of modified comparative negligence, a majority use the more forgiving 51% threshold — recovery is barred only once the claimant's fault actually exceeds the defendant's. A smaller group of 12 states uses a stricter 50% version instead, where recovery is barred at fault merely equal to the other side's.
The 21 states using a 51% bar
Nevada's peer group under this more common threshold is: Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana (for accidents from 2026 onward), Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
A genuine contrast right next door
Nevada's neighbor Idaho is a notable exception to any assumption of regional uniformity: Idaho actually uses the stricter 50% bar, meaning a claimant found exactly 50% at fault recovers something in Nevada but nothing at all in otherwise similar circumstances just across that state line.
Shared threshold, separate statutes
All 21 states share the same core threshold — fault exceeding 50% bars recovery — but each codifies this under its own statute, with its own precise wording and its own body of case law. Nevada's version, NRS 41.141, explicitly compares a claimant's fault to the combined negligence of all defendants, a structural detail worth confirming against each individual state's own statute rather than assuming it works identically everywhere.
Why this matters in a disputed claim
Because none of these 21 states bars recovery at an even 50/50 split, a disputed fault percentage near the midpoint still results in meaningful recovery across the group. See our full comparison of how Nevada's rule fits among all four fault systems for the complete picture.