How Does California Determine Fault in Personal Injury Cases?

California operates as an “at-fault” state for personal injury cases, meaning that determining who is responsible for an accident is necessary to reward claims and award compensation. Understanding how fault is determined is essential for anyone involved in a personal injury case, as it directly influences the outcome of the claim and the compensation awarded to the injured parties.

Determining Fault in California

Negligence is the primary basis for establishing fault in personal injury cases. To prove negligence, the following elements must be established:

Duty of Care: The defendant had a legal obligation to ensure the safety of others. For example, drivers have a duty of care to drive safely and follow traffic laws.
Breach of Duty: The defendant breached this duty through action or inaction. For example, distracted driving beaches the duty of driving safely.
Causation: The breach of duty caused the injury. If distracted driving leads to an accident, causation would be established.
Damages: The plaintiff suffered actual harm or damages as a result. This means that there are physical or emotional injuries that resulted from the accident.

Within the concept of negligence, there are two different legal systems that states can follow – comparative negligence and contributory negligence. California adheres to a pure comparative negligence system, which means that multiple parties can share the fault for an accident. For example, in a car accident where one party was engaging in distracted driving and the other ran a stop sign, both parties would likely share fault for the accident.

How Does Fault Affect Compensation?

Under California’s comparative negligence laws, each party’s compensation is reduced by their percentage of fault. For instance, if you are awarded $100,000 in damages but found to be 30% at fault, your compensation would be reduced by 30%, resulting in $70,000. This system ensures that each party is only held financially responsible for their share of the fault.

Some states use a modified form of comparative negligence where if a party is found to be at least 50% responsible for the accident, they cannot recover compensation. Other states use contributory negligence, where parties who share any of the fault, even 1%, cannot recover damages.

Evidence of Fault

Various types of evidence are used in determining fault in personal injury cases. These include:

Police Reports: Official documentation of the incident can provide critical insights into how the accident occurred and who might be at fault.
Witness Statements: Testimonies from people who saw the accident can offer an unbiased perspective.
Medical Records: Detailed accounts of the injuries sustained and their causes.
Accident Scene Photos and Videos: Visual evidence can be compelling in illustrating how the accident happened.
Expert Opinions: Specialists such as accident reconstruction experts can provide professional analysis and testimony regarding the incident.

An attorney can help gather evidence to support your case.

Strict Liability

In certain cases, California follows the concept of strict liability. This means that a party can be held liable for damages without the need to prove negligence or fault. Common examples include dog bite injuries and defective product accidents. In these cases, the injured party does not need to establish that the defendant was negligent to receive compensation.

Determining fault in personal injury cases in California involves a complex process of gathering evidence, proving negligence, and assessing each party’s contribution to the accident. The pure comparative fault system ensures that compensation is fairly distributed based on the degree of fault. If you are involved in a personal injury case, consulting with an Orange County injury lawyer is crucial to navigate the legal complexities and to ensure that your rights are protected and that you receive the compensation you deserve.

Annette DuBois, California Business Journal