California's Comparative Negligence Explained

TL;DR: California follows a pure comparative negligence system. That means if you’re partly at fault in a car accident, you can still recover damages—just reduced by your percentage of fault. This article explains how it works, how fault is calculated, and how to protect your claim.

What Is Comparative Negligence?

Comparative negligence is a legal principle that allows more than one person to be at fault for an accident. In pure comparative negligence states like California, each party can recover damages minus their share of fault.

Example: If you’re awarded $100,000 in damages but are found 30% at fault, you’ll receive $70,000.

Pure vs. Modified Comparative Negligence

California uses a pure system, meaning you can still recover damages even if you’re 99% at fault. In contrast, modified comparative negligence states bar recovery if your fault exceeds 50%.

How Is Fault Determined?

Fault percentages are typically assigned by:

• Insurance adjusters during claims
• Police reports or citations
• Eyewitness statements
• Dashcam or surveillance footage
• Court decision if the case goes to trial

Fault is not final just because an adjuster assigns it. You can challenge fault determinations.

Common Examples of Shared Fault in California

• Rear-End Collision: Front driver has broken brake lights
• Pedestrian Accident: Pedestrian jaywalks but driver was speeding
• Left-Turn Crash: Oncoming driver was texting when hit

In each of these, fault could be shared—and settlements adjusted accordingly.

Steps to Maximize Your Claim Under Comparative Negligence

1. Document the scene with photos, videos, and witness contacts
2. Seek medical care immediately and keep records
3. Avoid giving recorded statements without legal advice
4. Challenge inaccurate fault assessments with evidence
5. Consult an experienced car accident lawyer

California’s statute of limitations is 2 years from the date of the injury—but exceptions exist if symptoms appear later.

Client Success Stories

Los Angeles: A driver was rear-ended and initially blamed 40%. We reduced their fault to 10%, recovering $225,000.

Fresno: A pedestrian was found 60% at fault for jaywalking. Our team proved driver negligence and secured a 40% recovery of medical costs and pain and suffering.

Sacramento: A left-turn driver was assigned 70% fault. We successfully argued the oncoming driver was distracted, reducing fault to 30% and negotiating a $150,000 settlement.

Feeling Stressed About Shared Blame?

Take a deep breath. Write down your version of what happened. This helps keep your facts straight—and your emotions steady. We’ll handle the legal fight, so you can focus on healing.

Don’t Let Shared Fault Cost You Everything

Insurance companies use comparative negligence to pay you less. But they don’t get the final word. We know how to push back—and pursue every dollar you deserve.

No Win, No Fee. Contact us now for your free consultation.

— Neama Rahmani, Esq., President of West Coast Trial Lawyers

Neama Rahmani, a Harvard-educated attorney with over 20 years of experience and California Bar No. 240613, has recovered more than $1.7 billion for accident victims. Meet our attorneys, read real client stories, or verify Neama’s State Bar credentials.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always consult a qualified attorney for advice specific to your situation.