Missouri's roads witness thousands of car accidents each year, many of which stem from the negligence of another driver who ends up receiving a citation. While a police citation is strong evidence of fault, it doesn't automatically guarantee that the cited driver's insurance will accept full liability. Missouri follows a pure comparative fault system, meaning even if you're partially at fault, you can still recover damages—but your compensation is reduced by your percentage of blame. This legal nuance makes it crucial to understand how citations play into accident claims, especially when the other driver's reckless behavior is obvious. Don't assume the citation alone will resolve your case; proactive steps are necessary to protect your rights.

One unexpected insight is that police officers don't always issue citations at the scene, even when negligence is apparent. Officers may need further investigation, or they might believe the evidence isn't strong enough to justify an immediate citation. This doesn't mean the other driver wasn't at fault—it just means you'll need additional evidence to prove negligence, such as witness statements, traffic camera footage, or an accident reconstruction expert. Many drivers make the mistake of relying solely on the police report, only to find out later that the other driver's insurer disputes liability. Gathering your own evidence immediately after the crash can make or break your claim.

Another critical factor is the type of citation issued—was it for speeding, running a red light, or perhaps distracted driving? Different violations carry different weight in proving negligence, and some may not be as clear-cut as they seem. For example, a driver who was texting might only receive a minor traffic ticket, yet their distraction could have been the primary cause of the collision. Missouri law allows plaintiffs to introduce evidence of traffic violations as proof of negligence per se, meaning the violation itself can establish fault. However, insurance adjusters often downplay citations, arguing that they don't necessarily correlate with causation in the accident.

A surprising reality is that some at-fault drivers who receive citations later challenge them in court—and sometimes win. If the citation is dismissed, the other driver's insurance company may use this as leverage to deny your claim or shift blame onto you. This is why it's essential to build a case that doesn't solely hinge on the citation but also includes medical records, vehicle damage assessments, and expert testimony. Even if the citation stands, insurers will look for inconsistencies in your account to reduce payout amounts. Never assume that the legal process will unfold predictably; preparation is key.

Missouri's comparative negligence rule adds another layer of complexity, as the other driver's insurer may argue that you share some blame—for example, by braking too late or failing to avoid the collision. If they succeed, your compensation could be slashed by 20%, 50%, or more, depending on how much fault is assigned to you. This is why witness testimony is invaluable; unbiased third-party accounts can counter the other side's attempts to shift liability. Additionally, Missouri law allows for recovery of non-economic damages (like pain and suffering) only if you're less than 51% at fault, making fault allocation even more critical.

One practical tip many victims overlook is requesting the officer's bodycam or dashcam footage, which may capture crucial moments before the crash. Police departments don't always volunteer this evidence, but a formal request under Missouri's Sunshine Law can secure it. This footage might reveal the other driver swerving, failing to signal, or engaging in other negligent behaviors that weren't fully documented in the report. Similarly, nearby businesses or traffic cameras might have recorded the incident, but this footage is often deleted within weeks—acting quickly is essential. The more evidence you compile, the harder it becomes for the insurer to dispute liability.

Another often-missed detail is that Missouri requires drivers to carry uninsured motorist (UM) coverage, which can be a lifeline if the at-fault driver's insurance denies your claim or their policy limits are too low. Even if the other driver was cited, their insurer might drag out negotiations or refuse to pay a fair settlement. In such cases, filing a UM claim with your own insurer can provide compensation without lengthy litigation. However, insurers sometimes resist paying UM claims, arguing that the other driver wasn't truly at fault—another reason why strong evidence is indispensable.

A strategic move many don't consider is requesting the at-fault driver's cell phone records if distracted driving is suspected. While this requires legal procedures, proving they were texting or calling at the time of the crash can solidify your case. Missouri bans texting while driving for all drivers, making such evidence particularly damning in court. However, phone records are time-sensitive, and carriers often purge them after a few months. An experienced attorney can subpoena these records before they're lost forever.

One counterintuitive reality is that admitting even minor fault at the scene—such as saying, "I didn't see them coming"—can be twisted to imply greater liability. Insurance adjusters are trained to exploit such statements to minimize payouts. Instead, stick to factual observations without speculating on fault, and let the evidence speak for itself. Even polite apologies can be misconstrued as admissions of guilt, so be cautious in your interactions with the other driver and law enforcement.

Missouri's statute of limitations for car accident claims is generally five years for property damage and personal injury, but waiting too long can harm your case. Evidence disappears, witnesses forget details, and insurers grow more resistant as time passes. Filing early also prevents the at-fault driver from challenging their citation and undermining your claim. Additionally, serious injuries may require immediate legal action to secure medical liens or prevent debt collectors from interfering with your settlement.

An underutilized tactic is consulting an accident reconstruction expert early in the process, especially if liability is disputed. These experts analyze skid marks, vehicle positioning, and impact angles to determine fault objectively—often uncovering details the police missed. While hiring one may seem costly, their testimony can be pivotal in court or during settlement negotiations. Some personal injury attorneys work with reconstructionists regularly and may front the cost if your case is strong.

Finally, remember that Missouri law allows for punitive damages in extreme cases of negligence, such as drunk driving or reckless speeding. While rare, these damages punish the at-fault driver and provide additional compensation beyond medical bills and lost wages. However, proving gross negligence requires clear evidence of egregious behavior, such as a high BAC level or prior DUI convictions. If the other driver's actions were particularly outrageous, your attorney may pursue this avenue to maximize your recovery.

In conclusion, while a citation against the other driver is a strong starting point, it's only one piece of the puzzle. Missouri's legal landscape demands thorough evidence collection, strategic negotiation with insurers, and sometimes aggressive litigation to secure fair compensation. Whether it's securing camera footage, subpoenaing phone records, or leveraging expert testimony, proactive steps can mean the difference between a denied claim and a full recovery. Don't leave your case to chance—build it meticulously from the ground up.