The stricter, smaller modified group
Among US states using modified comparative negligence, a smaller group uses the stricter 50% threshold — recovery is barred once a plaintiff's fault merely equals the defendant's, not only once it exceeds that level. A larger group of states uses the more forgiving 51% bar instead.
The states using a 50% bar
Utah's peer group under this stricter threshold generally includes: Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Nebraska, North Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.
A shared threshold with a close neighbor
Utah's neighbor Idaho also uses the 50% bar, meaning the same strict threshold applies across that state line — a tie in fault bars recovery on both sides of the border.
A genuinely distinctive feature within this shared group
Here's where Utah stands apart from much of this list. Utah is a no-fault state for auto insurance, meaning a car accident claimant generally must cross a separate Personal Injury Protection (PIP) tort threshold before the 50% comparative fault bar even becomes relevant. Not every state in this 50%-bar group layers a no-fault system in front of its comparative negligence rule this way.
The underlying fault rule stays the same
Once a car accident claim actually crosses that separate PIP threshold in Utah, the same 50% comparative fault bar applies exactly as it would in any other personal injury claim — the no-fault system changes which claims get to the fault analysis in the first place, not the analysis itself.
Why this matters in a disputed claim
Because Utah and its peers in this group bar recovery at the midpoint itself, a disputed fault percentage landing right at an even split carries real consequences in any of these states. See our full comparison of how Utah's rule fits among all four fault systems for the complete picture.