The short answer? Yes. California law uses a structure known as pure comparative negligence. This concept comes into play when a driver pursuing legal action after a car crash was partly at fault for the accident in question. In a comparative negligence case, a jury determines the percentage of fault that the plaintiff had. The plaintiff will then recover the corresponding percentage of the total damages. For example, say Driver 1 was driving at night with their brake light out and was hit by Driver 2 who was driving drunk and speeding causing $1,000,000 in damages. Driver 2 is likely primarily at fault, but a jury may determine that Driver 1 also had fault. This would result in split liability. If the jury concurs that the accident caused $1,000,000 in damages and determines that Driver 1 was 20% at fault for the accident, Driver 1 would recover 80% of the total damages, or $800,000. If the jury determined that driver 1 was 40% at fault, Driver 1 would recover $600,000 from Driver 2. Pure comparative negligence damages are granted according to the percentage of fault. This means that even if you have a valid concern that you were partially at fault for an accident in which you suffered damages, you should still contact an experienced personal injury attorney at Arias Sanguinetti.
Comparative negligence cases are especially complex and require a top-class legal team. The attorneys at Arias Sanguinetti are trial lawyers with over 300 years of experience in complex cases – we have secured well over a billion dollars for our deserving clients. Most drivers who find themselves unsure about liability in a case like this have a lot of questions – our team has answers. Contact us today.
When did California adopt pure comparative negligence?
California is just 1 of just 12 states that use pure comparative negligence. Before 1975, California relied on pure contributory negligence – this meant that any partially at-fault party could not recover damages. In the prior example, the driver with the non-functioning brake light would not be able to recover any damages despite the fact that they were not the primary at-fault party. This changed in 1975 due to a California Supreme Court decision in Li v. Yellow Cab Co. that led to the pure comparative negligence model that we know today.
In Li v. Yellow Cab Co., the court held that the plaintiff, who was injured in an accident while completing a reckless driving maneuver, could still recover some damages that were primarily caused by a driver employed by Yellow Cab Co. who was going at an excessive speed. Plaintiff Li suffered serious damages and deserved to be compensated even if he was partially at fault. This case laid the groundwork for our work on California split liability cases. If you are worried that you won’t be able to recover financial compensation because you contributed to an accident in which you were injured, Li v. Yellow Cab Co. made it so that you might still be able to be compensated. Determining how this might apply to your case is complicated – contact us today to speak with a member of our team who can help you better understand your situation.
Can I still file a lawsuit if I was at fault for my accident?
You can absolutely still file a lawsuit if you were at fault thanks to pure comparative negligence. It is essential to consult with an experienced Los Angeles personal injury lawyer regarding the details of your claim. If you were 100% at fault, your legal options may be quite limited even if you suffered severe damages.
If you were less than 50% at fault for your accident, there are countless ways in which our team of Los Angeles personal injury attorneys can help you. Our team understands that the aftermath of a serious car crash can involve severe financial distress. We can help you recover the financial compensation you deserve, including compensation regarding:
- Medical Expenses. Medical expenses can add up very fast.
- Property Damage. Any damage to your car, valuable jewelry, or personal technology constitutes property damage.
- Lost Wages. Lost wages due to injury are common in personal injury cases.
- Loss of Consortium. This form of damages refers to deprivation of your marital relationship. If your marriage has suffered because of your accident, this may be a factor in your claim.
- Punitive Damages. Punitive damages apply when the at-fault party engaged in gross negligence such as drunk driving.
- Pain and Suffering. You deserve compensation for your pain and suffering.
Our team of Los Angeles personal injury lawyers brings over 300 years of combined experience in cases like yours. Contact us today to learn how we can help you recover from the financial devastation of a serious car crash.
Call or text 310-844-9696 or complete a Free Case Evaluation form
