§ 1A tort is a civil wrong, and negligence is the most common one
A tort is a civil wrong, other than a breach of contract, that a court can remedy with money damages. The word comes from the Latin for "twisted," which is a fair description of conduct that bends away from what the law expects. The person who brings the claim is the plaintiff; the person accused of the wrong is the defendant.
Tort claims and criminal cases can grow from the same event, but they are separate proceedings. The state prosecutes crimes and must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In a tort case, the injured person sues for compensation and generally has to prove the claim by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not.
Burden of proofPreponderance of the evidence is the default in Colorado civil cases. Exemplary damages require proof beyond a reasonable doubt under C.R.S. 13-25-127(2).
| Family | What has to be shown | Colorado examples |
|---|---|---|
| Intentional torts | The defendant meant to do the act that caused the harm. | Battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass. Many carry a one-year deadline. |
| Negligence | The defendant failed to use reasonable care, and that failure caused the harm. | Most falls, many workplace and recreation injuries, most vehicle crashes. |
| Strict liability | The harm happened in a covered situation; carelessness does not have to be proved. | Some defective product claims, serious dog bites under C.R.S. 13-21-124. |
The rest of this guide is about negligence, because that is where most Colorado claims live. The Colorado premises liability guide covers the statute that replaces ordinary negligence for property owners, and the product liability guide covers defect claims.
§ 2The four elements of a negligence claim
A negligence claim fails if any one element is missing. Insurance adjusters and defense lawyers know this, so most disputes focus on the weakest link, not the whole chain.
Duty
The defendant must have owed the plaintiff a duty of care. In everyday settings this is rarely contested: drivers owe it to other road users, businesses owe it to customers, employers owe it to the public. Colorado courts decide whether a duty exists as a question of law, weighing things like how foreseeable the harm was, the social value of the conduct, and the burden of guarding against it. Some duties are written by the legislature, and the Premises Liability Act is the best-known example.
Breach
The defendant failed to act as a reasonably careful person would in the same circumstances. Breach is usually a question for the jury, and the evidence tends to be practical: what the defendant knew, how long a hazard existed, what a safety code or the defendant's own written policy required, and what a reasonable alternative would have cost.
Causation
Colorado requires both cause in fact (the harm would not have happened without the breach, or the breach was a substantial factor) and a close enough connection that the law will hold the defendant responsible. Medical causation is where many claims are won or lost, because a defense expert may attribute symptoms to age, an earlier injury or a later event.
Damages
The plaintiff has to show actual loss. Careless conduct that injures no one is not a claim. The types of damages, and the statutory caps on some of them, are covered in the Colorado damage caps guide.
Pre-existing conditions
A common sticking point: the injured person already had a bad back or an old knee injury. Colorado follows the general rule that a defendant takes the plaintiff as it finds them, so aggravating a pre-existing condition can be compensable. But the defendant pays only for the aggravation, not for the condition that already existed, and separating the two usually takes medical records from before the incident. Collecting those records early saves time later.
§ 3Reasonable care, statutes, and professional standards
The yardstick for breach is the reasonable person: someone of ordinary prudence acting under the same circumstances. It is an objective test. A defendant who honestly did their best can still be negligent if a reasonable person would have done better.
Two refinements come up often. First, negligence per se: if the defendant violated a safety statute or ordinance designed to protect people like the plaintiff from the kind of harm that happened, the violation can establish breach. Second, professional negligence: doctors, engineers, lawyers and other licensed professionals are measured against the standard of their profession, which usually requires expert testimony. Colorado also requires a certificate of review in many claims against licensed professionals, filed within 60 days after service of the complaint under C.R.S. 13-20-602.
- the defendant broke a safety law meant to protect people like youNegligence per se may establish breach.
- you were hurt on someone's property because of its conditionThe Premises Liability Act, not ordinary negligence, sets the duty.
- the defendant is a licensed professional acting in that roleProfessional standard of care, expert testimony, certificate of review.
- none of these fitThe ordinary reasonable person standard.
§ 4Colorado comparative negligence and the 50% bar
Colorado is a modified comparative negligence state. Under C.R.S. 13-21-111, a plaintiff's own negligence does not automatically defeat the claim. Instead, the jury assigns a percentage of fault to each party, and the plaintiff's damages are reduced by the plaintiff's share. If the plaintiff's negligence is equal to or greater than the negligence of the defendants, the plaintiff recovers nothing.
StatuteC.R.S. 13-21-111 The jury returns special verdicts stating total damages and each party's percentage; the court does the reduction.
In practice, this turns a yes-or-no question into a sliding one. A shopper who was looking at a phone when they slipped might be assigned 20%. A cyclist without lights at night might be assigned more. The jury does not see the math done for it in advance; it reports the total damages and the percentages, and the court applies the reduction afterward.
People often assume that admitting any fault ends their claim. It does not, unless the share reaches 50%. The opposite mistake is also common: assuming a small share of fault costs a small amount. On a large verdict, every percentage point is real money.
§ 5Comparative fault calculator
Enter a hypothetical damages figure and move the slider. The result shows the reduction under C.R.S. 13-21-111 and what happens at the 50% line.
Illustration only. Damage caps, settlement credits and multiple defendants change real numbers.
§ 6Several defendants: who pays what
Colorado largely abolished joint and several liability for negligence. Under C.R.S. 13-21-111.5, each defendant is generally liable only for the share of damages that matches its own percentage of fault. If a jury assigns 70% to a property manager and 30% to a snow removal contractor, the plaintiff collects 70% of the reduced award from one and 30% from the other. If one cannot pay, the other does not cover the gap.
The statute also lets a defendant name a nonparty at fault: someone not sued (an absent driver, a former owner, an employer) whom the defendant says contributed to the harm. If the jury agrees, that nonparty's percentage reduces what the named defendants owe even though the plaintiff cannot collect it from anyone in that case. Nonparty designations have strict early deadlines, which is one more reason the timing of a lawsuit matters.
The bottom line
Prove all four elements, then expect the fight to move to percentages: yours, each defendant's, and any nonparty's. Below 50% you recover a reduced award. At 50% or above you recover nothing. Each defendant usually pays only its own share.
Car crashes: vehicle negligence follows the same fault rules but has a three-year filing period and its own insurance issues. A separate site covers Denver car accident claims in depth.
Colorado negligence questions
What is the difference between negligence and gross negligence in Colorado?
Ordinary negligence is a failure to use reasonable care. Conduct that is willful and wanton, meaning purposeful and done in reckless disregard of other people's rights and safety, sits higher on the scale. It matters mostly for exemplary (punitive) damages under C.R.S. 13-21-102, and for some immunity statutes that protect only against ordinary negligence.
Can I recover if I was 50% at fault?
No. Under C.R.S. 13-21-111, a plaintiff whose negligence is equal to or greater than the defendants' negligence recovers nothing. At 49% the award is reduced by 49%; at 50% it is barred. That is why the fault split is often the most argued number in a negligence case.
Does Colorado have joint and several liability?
Generally not for ordinary negligence. Under C.R.S. 13-21-111.5, each defendant usually pays only its own percentage of fault, called pro rata liability. There are exceptions, including people who consciously act together to commit a wrongful act.
What is negligence per se?
When someone violates a statute or ordinance meant to protect a class of people from a certain kind of harm, and you are in that class and suffered that harm, courts can treat the violation as proof that the person breached the duty of care. You still have to prove causation and damages.
Is a car accident a negligence claim?
Usually, yes, but vehicle claims have their own three-year deadline under C.R.S. 13-80-101(1)(n) and a layer of insurance rules. This site treats them only briefly; see the Denver auto accident guide for that subject.
No questions match that filter.
Last reviewed November 2026. Colorado statutes are amended often. Check the current Colorado Revised Statutes, or ask a licensed Colorado attorney, before relying on any figure or deadline here.