WYOMING GUIDE 17

Comparative Fault & Crash Liability

Wyoming does not decide a crash simply by asking which driver received a citation or who technically possessed the right-of-way. Fault is allocated among the people and entities whose conduct proximately contributed to the collision and resulting injuries.

How Comparative Fault Changes Recovery

Fault Is Allocated Among All Causative Actors

Wyoming’s comparative-fault statute uses the term actor, not merely defendant.

An actor can be a person or entity whose fault proximately contributed to the injury even if that actor is not formally a party to the lawsuit.

Depending on the crash, potential actors may include:

claimant driver
other driver
additional motorist
vehicle owner
employer
commercial operator
road contractor
governmental entity
vehicle manufacturer
other responsible entity

Right-of-Way Does Not Mean Zero Fault

A driver may possess the legal right-of-way and still have a duty to operate with reasonable care.

Speed, lookout, lane changes, traffic conditions and vehicle control remain relevant.

Bunning v. Romero — 2026

The preferred driver was traveling on a through highway and the other driver failed to yield.

But the preferred driver was also speeding and weaving through traffic. Wyoming courts allocated more than 50% of the fault to him, which barred his recovery.

The right-of-way remained his. It simply did not erase his own causative negligence.

A Traffic Violation Is Part of the Negligence Analysis

Wyoming does not apply a simplistic rule that every traffic-statute violation automatically decides negligence and liability.

Statutory violations can supply important evidence concerning the applicable standard of care, but the analysis still requires breach, proximate causation and comparative fault.

Question	Why It Matters
What traffic rule applied?	Identify the actual statutory duty.
Was it violated?	Determine the underlying conduct rather than relying solely on a citation.
Was there an excuse or unusual circumstance?	Weather, emergency and unexpected roadway conditions may affect the reasonable-care analysis.
Did the conduct cause the crash?	A violation unrelated to the collision does not itself establish crash causation.
What did the other actors contribute?	Wyoming ultimately compares causative fault.

A Traffic Conviction Does Not Decide the Civil Case

Wyoming law provides that evidence of a conviction for a violation of the Wyoming traffic act is not admissible in a civil action.

The underlying crash evidence remains important: photographs, witnesses, measurements, vehicle data, video, roadway evidence and expert reconstruction.

Loss of Control Is Not Automatic Negligence

A vehicle crossing a center line or leaving its lane is powerful evidence to investigate, but Wyoming does not presume negligence merely because a collision occurred.

In a winter-weather crash, determine whether the condition was known, reasonably foreseeable, sudden or unexpected.