How Comparative Negligence Impacts Settlement Negotiations in California
January 5, 2026- Categories: Personal Injury
Comparative negligence impacts settlement negotiations in California by allowing an injured person to recover damages even if they were partially at fault, but their percentage of responsibility reduces their final compensation.
Insurance companies often use this rule to argue for a higher percentage of fault on the part of the injured person, which directly lowers the settlement offer.
When dealing with an injury claim, facing an accusation that you share blame for the accident can be frustrating. Understanding how comparative negligence in California works is a key part of the personal injury settlement process.
Legal professionals can help build a strong case to challenge unfair blame-shifting and protect the value of a claim. The legal team at Neale & Fhima is prepared to counter these insurance tactics and advocate for a fair apportionment of fault.
When you are ready to learn how these legal insights affect your case, schedule a free case evaluation with our experienced personal injury attorneys in California to explore your next steps.
Key Takeaways About Why Legal Representation Matters in California Comparative Negligence Cases
- California is a “pure” comparative negligence state: You can recover compensation even if you were 99% at fault for an accident. However, your total settlement will be reduced by your assigned percentage of fault, making it critical to minimize that percentage.
- Insurance companies use this to reduce payouts: Adjusters often assign blame to justify lower settlement offers, citing reasons like minor speeding or distractions, even with little evidence.
- Evidence is key to disputing fault: A lawyer can gather and present evidence such as police reports, witness statements, and accident reconstruction to challenge unfair fault allocations and maximize your recovery under California Civil Code § 1714.
- Fault allocation affects your entire settlement: The percentage of fault assigned to you impacts all forms of compensation, including medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering, making strong legal advocacy essential to protect your claim.
What Is Comparative Negligence in California?
California follows a legal doctrine known as “pure comparative negligence.” In simple terms, this rule allows for the allocation of fault among all parties involved in an accident.
If an injured person is found to be partially responsible for the incident that caused their injuries, they can still recover damages from the other at-fault party.
However, their total compensation will be reduced in proportion to their degree of fault. For example, if you were awarded $100,000 in damages but found to be 20% at fault for the accident, your final recovery would be reduced by 20%, leaving you with $80,000.
This differs from the laws in some other states, where if you are found to be 50% or more at fault, you may be barred from recovering any compensation at all. California’s rule provides a path to recovery even when there is shared fault.
How Comparative Negligence Affects Settlement Negotiations
Insurance adjusters are well aware of California’s comparative fault law and often use it as a primary tactic during settlement negotiations. Their goal is to minimize the amount the insurance company has to pay out. They will closely examine the facts of the case to find any evidence that suggests you contributed to the accident.
During negotiations, an adjuster might:
- Allege you were distracted: They might claim you were using your phone or not paying attention, even with little evidence.
- Question your actions: In a slip and fall case, they could argue you were not watching where you were going or were wearing inappropriate footwear.
- Misinterpret traffic laws: For a car accident, they might misapply the right-of-way rules to shift blame onto you.
- Make a low offer based on a high fault percentage: An adjuster may open negotiations with an offer that reflects an unfairly high percentage of fault assigned to you.
Having a personal injury lawyer is your defense against these strategies. An attorney can present counterarguments and evidence to demonstrate that the other party bears primary responsibility.
Examples of Shared Fault in Personal Injury Cases
Comparative negligence can apply in almost any type of personal injury claim, including those for:
- Car accidents: A driver is speeding through an intersection and is hit by another driver who ran a red light. While the driver who ran the light is primarily at fault, the speeding driver may be found partially at fault for contributing to the severity of the crash.
- Pedestrian accidents: A pedestrian crosses the street outside of a marked crosswalk and is hit by a distracted driver. The driver may be considered negligent for being distracted, but the pedestrian may also be assigned a percentage of fault for jaywalking.
- Slip and fall incidents: A person slips on a wet floor in a grocery store that had no warning sign. However, if security footage shows the person was looking at their phone and not paying attention, the property owner might argue the person shares some fault.
In each of these situations, the ability to prove the other party’s greater degree of negligence is directly tied to the final settlement amount.
The Role of a Lawyer in Navigating Comparative Negligence
An experienced personal injury lawyer plays a critical role in defending against unfair allegations of comparative negligence. They work to gather and present evidence that paints a clear picture of what happened and who was truly responsible.
Attorneys can protect your claim by:
- Conducting a thorough investigation: This includes obtaining police reports, interviewing witnesses, and gathering photos or video footage of the accident scene.
- Working with reconstructionists: In complex cases, accident reconstructionists analyze physical evidence to determine factors such as vehicle speed, points of impact, and other details that establish fault.
- Handling all communications: Your lawyer will manage all discussions with the insurance company, presenting a strong legal argument and countering any attempts to shift blame.
- Negotiating from a position of strength: By building a well-documented case, your attorney can negotiate for a settlement that accurately reflects the other party’s level of responsibility.
This proactive approach is often the key to minimizing your assigned percentage of fault. If you are struggling with unfair blame assignment in a California personal injury claim, speak with a lawyer to understand how they may be able to help fight for the maximum compensation you may be eligible for under the law.
California Comparative Negligence FAQs
What if the other driver lies and says the accident was my fault?
This is a common occurrence. It becomes a matter of evidence. Your lawyer will use witness testimony, physical evidence from the scene, police reports, and any available video footage to challenge the other driver’s version of events and establish the facts.
Can I still file a claim if the police report says I was partially at fault?
A police report is an important piece of evidence, but the officer’s opinion on fault is not the final word on the matter. An attorney can still build a case to dispute the officer’s conclusion and show that the other party was more at fault than the report suggests.
How is the final percentage of fault determined?
If the case settles out of court, the percentage is determined through negotiations between your lawyer and the insurance company. If the case goes to trial, the percentage of fault is decided by a judge or jury after they have heard all the evidence.
Contact Neale & Fhima for Help with Your California Personal Injury Claim
Navigating a personal injury claim is challenging enough without an insurance company trying to blame you for your own injuries.
California’s comparative negligence rule is a powerful tool for insurers, and without a strong legal advocate, you risk losing a significant portion of the compensation you may be entitled to.
The team at Neale & Fhima is experienced in handling complex personal injury claims involving shared fault. We know how to build a case designed to minimize your percentage of liability and will fight to secure a settlement that is fair and just.
Are you ready to fight back against unfair blame-shifting from an insurance company after someone else’s negligence caused you harm? Contact the personal injury attorneys at Neale & Fhima today for a free consultation to discuss your case and learn how we can help.
Legal Resources For Personal Injury Victims in California
The following resources provide trusted, attorney-curated advice and insights relevant to those pursuing injury claims involving shared fault in California:
- The Role of Mediation in California Personal Injury Claims
- Do You Have to Go to Court for a California Personal Injury Claim?
- Expert Witnesses in California Personal Injury Lawsuits
Have legal questions about your right to pursue compensation for someone else’s negligent actions? Contact our California personal injury law firm to explore your legal rights and options during a free case evaluation.
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 ]
