This must be the case in PA.
State Restrictions on Recovering Compensation If You Were Careless
Comparative negligence is applied in three slightly different ways, depending on the state where the accident occurred. The more generous states allow you to recover compensation for your injuries in an amount based on the other person's fault no matter how great your own fault was. Most states, however, use a slightly more restrictive rule under which you can't recover anything if your own carelessness was 50% or more responsible for the accident. And a handful of tight-fisted states don't allow you to recover any compensation at all if your fault is any more than "slight" compared to the others involved -- or, worse, if your own carelessness contributed in any way to the accident. (This is called "contributory negligence.") You can find the rules for your state in How to Win Your Personal Injury Claim, by Joseph Matthews (Nolo).
Heard this argument so many times on traffic accidents it's not even funny. People saying "it's not my fault, I only blew the light and hit the other car because I slid on ice". I can understand this when it's a case of black ice on a a mostly dry roadway, but not during blizzards or ice storms. People don't seem to understand the idea that it's your responsibility to adjust your speed in accordance to the weather conditions, your vehicle's abilities and your driving skill. A byproduct of this litigious society seems to be a complete disregard for common sense. If it isn't explicitly stated on neon yellow "CAUTION" sign, it's as if people believe they have no responsibility to consider it. If the speed limit says 55mph, it can't possibly their fault for crashing in ice/snow/fog when they were doing 55mph. Surely, the town/county/state should have changed the sign if conditions required speed to be reduced.
It HAS to be somebody else's fault, because the lawyers say so!
