Comparative Negligence Laws in California
Fault in a personal injury case does not always go entirely to one party. It is common to see cases where two or more people share fault while filing a personal injury case in Los Angeles, including a proportion of fault being placed on the plaintiff or injured party. The law California uses to deal with these scenarios is known as the comparative negligence doctrine.
What Are Comparative Negligence Laws?
Comparative negligence is a personal injury law principle that can be used by the courts to reduce the amount of financial compensation available to a plaintiff based on the degree that he or she contributed to the incident.
The comparative negligence law recognizes that sometimes, victims are partially at fault due to their own negligence. States with these laws uphold that this should not bar a plaintiff entirely from recovering financial compensation from other at-fault parties.
The majority of states, including California, use comparative negligence laws. However, a few uphold contributory negligence doctrines. These are less plaintiff-friendly. In a contributory negligence state, such as Alabama or North Carolina, if a plaintiff is found to be any degree at fault (even 1 percent), he or she cannot recover any financial damages from another party.
California’s Pure Comparative Negligence Law
California uses a pure comparative negligence law. Under this rule, you can still get compensation if you are partially at fault for an incident, such as sharing fault with another driver in a car accident case.
California Code of Civil Procedure §1714 states:
- (a) Everyone is responsible, not only for the result of his or her willful acts, but also for an injury occasioned to another by his or her want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his or her property or person, except so far as the latter has, willfully or by want of ordinary care, brought the injury upon himself or herself.
The “pure” part of state law allows plaintiffs to remain eligible for financial recovery with any degree of fault short of 100 percent. In “modified” comparative negligence states, there is a cap on a plaintiff’s right to receive financial compensation, typically around 50 percent of fault.
How Might the Comparative Negligence Law Affect Your Personal Injury Case in California?
If a plaintiff in a California personal injury case shares fault with another party to any degree, his or her financial award will be reduced by the courts by an equivalent value. If you file a car accident claim, for example, and are assigned 15 percent of fault while the other party is given 85 percent, your judgment award would be diminished by 15 percent.
In this example, if a jury granted you a verdict of $500,000 from a car insurance company or defendant, this award would then be reduced by 15 percent to match your share of comparative negligence. This would diminish your final payout by $75,000 for a total of $425,000.
How a Personal Injury Lawyer in Los Angeles, CA Can Help
The comparative negligence law in California has the potential to drastically reduce the amount of financial compensation you receive for your injury case. This is why it is critical to contact a personal injury lawyer for assistance and representation if someone else is attempting to blame you for a car accident, slip and fall, or another harmful incident.
A lawyer can investigate your accident, collect strong evidence establishing someone else’s fault or negligence, take over communications with insurance claims adjusters to protect your rights, and use aggressive negotiation skills to try to achieve a fair settlement out of court. If your personal injury case has to go to trial, an attorney can help argue your side of the case to minimize your comparative negligence as much as possible – protecting and maximizing your payout.