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
Oregon'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
Oregon's neighbor Washington is a notable exception to any assumption of regional uniformity: Washington actually uses pure comparative negligence, meaning a claimant found 90% at fault still recovers something there, while that same claimant would be fully barred just across the state line in Oregon.
A genuinely distinctive application within this shared group
Here's where Oregon stands apart from much of this list. After its 2020 Busch v. McInnis Waste Systems decision, Oregon has no general statutory cap on noneconomic damages for a living plaintiff's ordinary personal injury claim — the state's own $500,000 cap was struck down as unconstitutional. Several other states in this 51%-bar group still maintain their own statutory caps on pain-and-suffering awards.
A shared story with a fellow 51%-bar state
Oklahoma, another member of this same 51%-bar group, has a genuinely similar story: its own noneconomic damages cap was struck down as unconstitutional in 2019. Oregon and Oklahoma stand as two notable examples within this larger group where a state's damages cap didn't survive constitutional scrutiny.
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 — and in Oregon specifically, that recovery, once established, isn't capped by the kind of statutory ceiling some neighboring states still apply. See our full comparison of how Oregon's rule fits among all four fault systems for the complete picture.