How Comparative Fault Affects Wrongful Death Cases in California

How Comparative Fault Affects Wrongful Death Cases in California

• October 4, 2025
• Categories: Wrongful Death

In California, comparative fault impacts wrongful death cases by proportionally reducing compensation based on the deceased person’s share of responsibility. Also referred to as a pure comparative negligence system, this rule asserts that multiple parties can be at fault for a wrongful death – including the person who died – and that compensation should be apportioned based on the percentage of fault assigned to each party. For example, if a jury were to award $1 million in damages but find the deceased person to be 30% responsible for the fatal accident, the family would receive $700,000 (the total award minus $300,000, or 30%).

Burden of Proof: Defendants must prove the deceased’s negligence contributed to the death. This often requires expert testimony, accident reconstruction, and eyewitness accounts.

While pure comparative fault introduces complexity into wrongful death cases, it also ensures fair apportionment of liability. Families should consult experienced wrongful death attorneys to navigate these challenges and maximize recovery.

The History of Pure Comparative Negligence in CA

California adopted its pure comparative fault system to ensure equitable apportionment of liability, replacing what the court saw as an outdated and harsh contributory negligence doctrine.  California transitioned to pure comparative negligence in 1975 through the landmark California Supreme Court case Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (13 Cal. 3d 804, 532 P. 2d 1226). The court abolished contributory negligence, which previously barred recovery entirely if the plaintiff shared even 1% fault. The system is rooted in California Civil Code § 1714, which states:

“Everyone is responsible … for an injury occasioned to another by his or her want of ordinary care … except so far as the latter has … brought the injury upon himself or herself.”

Why California Uses Comparative Fault

There are a few reasons why California transitioned to the pure comparative fault system when awarding damages in personal injury and wrongful death cases. These include:

1. Fairness Over All-or-Nothing

The prior contributory negligence rule was criticized for denying recovery to plaintiffs with minor fault (for example, 5%). Pure comparative fault ensures plaintiffs receive at least some compensation that is proportional to liability, even if they are partially or significantly at fault.

2. Judicial Initiative

The California Supreme Court in Li v. Yellow Cab Co. acted without waiting for legislative action, citing the need to modernize tort law. The ruling aligned California with an emerging trend toward equitable liability allocation.

3. Impact on Multi-Party or Complex Cases

The system simplifies complex cases involving multiple defendants by assigning fault percentages to each party.

California courts now apply the pure comparative fault approach to all personal injury and wrongful death cases. Because of proportional liability, this rule affects the way attorneys negotiate with insurance companies when trying to achieve a settlement.

How Does California’s Pure Comparative Fault System Compare to Other States’?

California’s pure comparative negligence system stands in contrast to that of most states, offering broader recovery rights for plaintiffs even when they share significant responsibilities for their own injuries. Here’s how it compares nationally:

1. Modified Comparative Negligence (Majority of States)

States use one of two rules to bar recovery entirely if plaintiffs exceed a fault threshold:

• 50% Rule: Recovery barred if plaintiff is ≥50% at fault (like Arkansas, Colorado).
• 51% Rule: Recovery barred if plaintiff is ≥51% at fault (like Texas, Illinois).

2. Contributory Negligence (4 States + D.C.)

Plaintiffs recover nothing if even 1% at fault (like Maryland, Alabama).

While California’s approach remains a minority model, it ensures that even highly negligent plaintiffs retain partial recovery rights, which contrasts sharply with stricter systems in other states. If these negligence/fault systems seem confusing, that’s because they are. Consulting a personal injury lawyer or wrongful death attorney about the unique facts in your case is the best way to understand the laws and find out what your case might be worth.

Why Choose Neale & Fhima?

At Neale & Fhima, our attorneys have more than 40 years of combined experience in handling wrongful death cases in California. We know the complexities of fault and liability under California law, and we use this knowledge to pursue the highest compensation possible for our clients. We’re transparent and will explain to you the legal process, potential challenges, and estimated value of your claim before you make a decision about hiring us. We have many satisfied clients who refer friends and family to our law firm.

Legal Deadlines for California Wrongful Death Lawsuits

It’s important to adhere to deadlines for California wrongful death claims so that you aren’t inadvertently barred from seeking recovery. Even being weeks or a month late could mean the difference between receiving a significant financial award or getting no compensation whatsoever. Deadlines are as follows:

• 2-Year Statute of Limitations: Most wrongful death lawsuits must be filed within 2 years of the date of death.
• 6-Month Deadline for Government Entities: Claims against government entities require a notice within six months.
• Medical Malpractice: Claims against doctors and medical facilities for malpractice must be filed within 1 year from the date of discovery or 3 years from the date of injury, whichever comes first.

Because of these strict deadlines for filing a wrongful death claim, it’s better to act sooner rather than later by contacting an attorney, even though your family is experiencing overwhelming grief at the loss of a loved one.

Contact Neale & Fhima Today for Aggressive Representation in Your Wrongful Death Case

We know this is a difficult time for you and your family.  That’s why we’re here to handle the legal side of things so you don’t have to. Our caring lawyers — including highly experienced attorney Aaron Fhima — will support you with concern and empathy throughout the legal process.  Insurance companies are known for taking advantage of grieving families in wrongful death cases by delaying the claims process, giving early low-ball offers, and shifting blame. Our lawyers won’t let that happen. Neale & Fhima has an outstanding record of recovering more than $50 million in rightful compensation for victims throughout Southern California. For a free consultation about your case, call us at 888-407-2955.