Comparative Fault in California
April 18, 2025- Categories: Car Accidents
Picture a gray SUV traveling down Interstate 5 on a sunny afternoon in heavy traffic. The driver of the vehicle is texting a friend and doesn’t notice a traffic barrel in the middle of his lane. When he looks up, he brakes suddenly, causing the vehicle behind him – a black minivan – to crash into the back of his vehicle. The driver of the minivan is also distracted by her cell phone. The driver of a third vehicle, a red sports car, is fully aware of what is happening but is following the minivan too closely and can’t brake in time to avoid a collision.
In the wake of this multi-vehicle crash, all three vehicles are greatly damaged and all three drivers suffer moderate injuries. If a lawsuit involving this accident went to trial in California, fault would have to be determined before a judge or jury could grant compensation. But how is a jury to determine fault in such a situation? This is where the concept of comparative fault comes in.
Were you seriously injured in a car accident? Comparative fault rules can have a significant effect on how much compensation you receive from a claim related to the accident. Contact the experienced car accident lawyers at Neale & Fhima APC at 888-407-2955 to learn how this legal principle may affect your claim.
Factors Used to Determine Fault in California
A judge or jury would consider several factors when trying to determine who was at fault in the accident. First, drivers are prohibited from texting while driving. The first two drivers were both distracted and, thus, will likely bear much of the responsibility for the crash. But what about the fact that drivers are urged to leave adequate space between themselves and the vehicle in front of them? In that sense, the second and third vehicles might also share fault for the collision.
There is another factor that might be important in this case. The entire collision was caused by a traffic barrel. Was there a construction company responsible for keeping that barrel out of traffic, and did they fail to take reasonable actions that could have prevented the crash? If the answer is yes, then determining negligence becomes even more complicated. It is possible that yet another party shares some degree of fault in this multi-car accident.
Multiple parties may have performed actions that contributed to an accident. A jury must look at all factors and determine which contributed the most to attribute fault.
Comparative Fault as a Legal Principle
Why It Matters for Your Compensation
Comparative fault has been a guiding principle in California law since the 1970s. As opposed to contributory negligence – the concept that if a plaintiff was even 1 percent responsible for an injury, they would be denied compensation – comparative fault allows for a more nuanced, fair approach to determining who will be awarded payment in a personal injury case. When a judge provides jury instructions in a personal injury lawsuit, they will typically explain to the jury how comparative fault works and how it affects the outcome of the case.
Comparative Fault in California
While comparative fault is the guiding legal principle in many states, not all states use the same version of this principle. California uses a form of the principle known as pure comparative fault.
Under pure comparative fault, a plaintiff can get compensation even if they are mostly responsible for their injuries. For example, suppose that a jury determines a plaintiff is 95% responsible for their injuries. In this case, the plaintiff would still be eligible for compensation. However, because they are partially responsible for their injuries, the amount of compensation they receive would be reduced. In this case, any jury award would be reduced by 95%, as that is the percentage of responsibility that the plaintiff carries for their injuries.
Similarly, for the SUV example, a jury might assign 50% responsibility to the original driver, 40% responsibility to the SUV driver, and 10% responsibility to the driver of the sports car. If the driver of the sports car was awarded $100,000 by a jury, the original driver would be responsible for $50,000, the SUV driver for $40,000, and the plaintiff for the rest. Most likely, the insurance companies for these individuals would provide compensation based on the results of the trial.
How an Attorney Can Help with Comparative Fault
Attorneys who handle personal injury claims in California know how important it is to build a solid case on behalf of their client to ensure the lowest level of comparative fault possible. Personal injury attorneys accomplish this goal by investigating the circumstances of a case, looking for signs of negligence among other parties involved, and presenting evidence that their client was acting properly.
There are two things someone involved in a vehicle crash should keep in mind about comparative fault. First, even if they share some responsibility for a crash, they can still recover some compensation for the damages they’ve suffered. Consulting with a vehicle accident lawyer can provide clarity on how fault is determined and what compensation might be available. Second, the amount you can recover will be based on the strength of the case you present, so it’s best to enlist the services of a skilled, experienced personal injury attorney.
Hopefully, the hypothetical crash described above won’t happen to you. But if it does, make sure you consider all your legal options and speak to a vehicle and pedestrian accident lawyer who will represent your best interests in a personal injury claim.
Contact a Skilled California Car Accident Attorney Today
Determining fault is one of the most important steps in any car accident claim. Each insurance company will generally be responsible for a portion of any claim payments based on the amount that their policyholder was responsible for the accident.
Since insurance companies have a financial incentive to find the other party responsible, you need a knowledgeable advocate who is fighting for you. The lawyers at Neale & Fhima APC can help you build a strong case to help you secure the compensation you deserve.
If you’d like to speak with an attorney about a potential claim or to learn how comparative fault might be applied to your case, contact the Southern California personal injury attorneys at Neale & Fhima. Schedule a free consultation by filling out our online contact form or calling us at 888-407-2955.
Attorney Aaron Fhima
Aaron Fhima is a trial attorney who has secured numerous settlements and verdicts against large corporations and some of the largest auto manufacturers in the world. Representing consumers and injury victims throughout the state of California, Aaron’s practice areas include personal injury, and lemon law litigation. Aaron has a long record of success taking on large defense firms; and he doesn’t hesitate to take cases to trial when necessary to enforce his clients’ rights. [ Attorney Bio ]
