Skip to content
MyClaimWorth
AZ
★ Arizona · fracture

Fracture settlements
in Arizona.

By 6 min read

Arizona applies pure comparative negligence and is one of the few US states whose constitution prohibits statutory caps on personal injury damages. For fracture claims specifically, the band is built from the state-by-state tort law · jury verdict reporters · statutory caps framework and then adjusted for Arizona's pure comparative negligence and any applicable statutory cap.

Arizona applies pure comparative negligence, which means a fracture claimant who is partly responsible for their own injury still recovers — the award is reduced by the percentage of fault attributed to them, but never barred. This is materially more claimant-friendly than the modified or contributory rules in neighbouring jurisdictions, and it shows up in fracture settlements where comparative fault is contested (the claimant who failed to mitigate, the unbelted occupant, the worker who departed from a safety protocol).

Arizona's caps (no statutory cap) apply to the non-economic component of fracture damages and can compress upper-tier verdicts. The exact application depends on the cause of action and the head of damage; the caps section on this page sets out each ceiling and the conditions under which it bites.

★ band · US federal frame
$15,000 – $80,000
Wrist or arm fracture
Settlement aggregates

The US band is the starting point. Arizona's fault rule and any applicable cap then adjust the figure.

★ AZ · statute of limitations
2 years from date of injury

A.R.S. § 12-542

★ AZ · fault rule
Pure comparative negligence

Pure comparative negligence — recovery available at any fault percentage, reduced proportionally. The Arizona Constitution prohibits caps on damages in death or personal injury actions.

★ AZ · caps

What caps recovery.

Statutory caps that may bear on a fracture settlement in Arizona.

★ fracture · neighbouring jurisdictions

Compare to neighbours.

How Arizona's fault rule and limitation period compare to other US jurisdictions for fracture claims.

JurisdictionFault ruleLimitationFracture page
Arizona · you are herePure comparative negligence2 years from date of injury—
AlabamaPure contributory negligence2 years from date of injuryAL · fracture →
AlaskaPure comparative negligence2 years from date of injury or discoveryAK · fracture
ArkansasModified comparative — 50% bar3 years for personal injury; 2 years for medical malpracticeAR · fracture →
CaliforniaPure comparative negligence2 years for personal injury; 1 year for medical malpractice (with 3-year repose)CA · fracture →
ColoradoModified comparative — 50% bar2 years for personal injury; 3 years for motor vehicleCO · fracture →
ConnecticutModified comparative — 51% bar2 years from date of injuryCT · fracture →
DelawareModified comparative — 51% bar2 years from date of injuryDE · fracture
District of ColumbiaPure contributory negligence3 years from date of injuryDC · fracture →
FloridaModified comparative — 51% bar2 years from date of injury (was 4; reduced by HB 837)FL · fracture →
GeorgiaModified comparative — 50% bar2 years from date of injuryGA · fracture →
HawaiiModified comparative — 51% bar2 years from date of injuryHI · fracture
IdahoModified comparative — 50% bar2 years from date of injuryID · fracture
★ AZ · fracture · frequently asked

Common questions.

Each answer is independently coherent and references the relevant statute or authority document.

★ all of AZ
Arizona overview

Fault rule, statute, caps, and key facts for Arizona as a whole.

★ federal frame
Fracture in United States

Fracture band structure and severity tiers at the US level.

★ all 15 countries
Fracture · everywhere

Cross-jurisdiction comparison of fracture bands.

★ editorial note

Figures on this page are starting points: the US band adjusted for Arizona's statutory framework. They are not quotes for any specific case. For representation, consult an attorney admitted in Arizona. See /methodology, /sources, and /disclaimer.