California is known for many things, including its picturesque Pacific coastlines, lush forests, and diverse landscapes. It is also well known for its entertainment industry, technological innovations, and agricultural production. Unfortunately, it is also known for being one of the states with the highest percentage of traffic accidents.
According to California's Office of Traffic Safety (OTS), California was home to nearly 217,000 traffic accidents in 2022. Of those roughly 217,000, approximately 3,854 resulted in fatalities, and an estimated 164,978 resulted in injuries. And pretty much all of these accidents caused property damage of some kind. To determine liability and the amount of damages individuals can recover following an accident, California utilizes a tort law known as pure comparative negligence, which falls under California Civil Code Section 1714.
What Is Pure Comparative Negligence?
Also known as proportionate liability, pure comparative negligence is a California law that allows a plaintiff to recover damages even if they are 99% liable for causing an accident. That means a plaintiff can still recover 1% of the damages assessed from a defendant in a traffic accident case. If, for example, a plaintiff is 90% liable for causing an accident totaling $50,000, they are still eligible to pursue compensation. However, the compensation they are eligible to receive is reduced by 90%, so the most they could recover in damages is $5,000. If the plaintiff, on the other hand, is 100% liable for causing the accident, they would not be eligible to recover any damages under pure comparative negligence. California is only 1 of 12 states that use the pure comparative negligence system.
How Does Pure Comparative Negligence Work if More Than Two Vehicles Are Involved in an Accident?
California's pure comparative negligence law works the same way regardless of the number of vehicles involved in an accident. Each driver is assigned a percentage of fault based on their role in causing an accident, and that percentage reduces how much they can collect in damages. For example, if three drivers were involved in an accident totaling $100,000 in damages, and each driver was 70%, 20%, and 10% respectively at fault, the damages they could each recover would be proportional to their degree of fault in the accident. In this scenario, the first driver could recover up to $30,000 in damages. The second and third drivers could recover up to $80,000 and $90,000, respectively. Long story short, fault allocation and associated damage reduction under California's pure comparative negligence system apply no matter how many vehicles are involved in an accident. And this is what differentiates pure comparative negligence from modified comparative negligence used in other states.
What Is Modified Comparative Negligence?
With modified comparative negligence, a plaintiff can only recover damages if they are 50% or less responsible for causing a traffic accident. For example, if a plaintiff is 40% at fault for causing an accident and the defendant is 60% at fault, the plaintiff can pursue compensation. However, the amount of damages they are eligible to receive, through either an out-of-court settlement or a court judgment, will be reduced by 40%. If the plaintiff, on the other hand, is 51% or more at fault for causing the accident, they are not eligible to recover damages under the modified comparative negligence system.
How Is Fault Assigned Under the Pure Comparative Negligence System?
Under California's pure comparative negligence system, the following are used to determine each driver's fault percentage after an accident:
- Insurance investigations
- Police reports
- Statements made by accident reconstruction experts
- Traffic violations and citations issued
- Traffic cameras or dashcam footage
- Witness statements
Why You Should Hire an Attorney to Represent You in a California Traffic Accident Case
While you don't necessarily need an attorney to file a compensation claim or argue a traffic case in court, you would be doing yourself an enormous disservice by not hiring one. An experienced personal injury attorney is familiar with insurance company practices, which means they are likely to do an excellent job when it comes to negotiating a fair settlement. They are also experts at case preparation, which encompasses gathering and organizing evidence critical to your case, such as witness statements, police reports, medical records, and statements from accident reconstruction experts, to help support your claim. And it does not end there.
According to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 335.1, California drivers only have two years to file a claim for damages following a traffic accident. A personal injury attorney will ensure all necessary legal filings are done correctly and on time. They also strive to get you the maximum compensation possible, which they do by identifying all losses associated with the accident, such as medical expenses, lost wages, property damage, and pain and suffering.
