Accident Injury Law in California

Statute of Limitations in California

California's general statute of limitations for personal injury claims is two years from the date of injury under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1. This deadline is hard and unforgiving — a lawsuit filed one day after the two-year window is permanently barred regardless of how strong the underlying claim is.

The two-year period begins to run on the date the injury occurs in most cases. For motor vehicle collisions, slip and fall accidents, and other acute trauma events where the injury is immediately apparent, the clock starts on the day of the accident. An injured person who waits until two years and one day to file has lost their claim entirely.

The discovery rule is an important exception that delays the start of the limitations period in cases where the injury was not immediately apparent or where the connection between a known injury and its cause was not immediately knowable. California courts apply the discovery rule in cases involving latent disease, occupational exposure, medical malpractice where complications are not immediately obvious, and toxic tort claims. For standard personal injury cases — car accidents, pedestrian strikes, slip and fall injuries — the discovery rule rarely applies because the injury is apparent at the time of the incident.

Minor tolling is a significant exception. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 352, the statute of limitations is tolled (paused) during a plaintiff's minority. A minor injured in an accident generally has until their 20th birthday to file a personal injury lawsuit, regardless of when the accident occurred. Parents may file on behalf of a minor child within the standard period without waiting for the child to reach majority.

Government entity claims carry a dramatically shorter deadline. If the at-fault party is a government entity — a city, county, school district, Caltrans, or other public body — the injured person must first file a government tort claim with the responsible entity under Government Code section 945.4. This claim must be presented within six months of the incident — not two years. The government entity then has 45 days to accept, deny, or ignore the claim. If denied or ignored, the claimant has six months from the rejection date to file a lawsuit. Missing the six-month claim presentation deadline permanently bars the claim against the government entity.

Mental incapacity tolling applies when the injured person is mentally incapacitated at the time the injury occurs, such as in cases involving severe traumatic brain injury. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 352, the limitations period is tolled during the period of incapacity. Once capacity is restored, the standard limitations period begins to run.

Comparative Fault in California

California uses pure comparative fault, the plaintiff-friendly end of the comparative negligence spectrum. Under this doctrine, an injured person can recover compensation from a negligent defendant even if the plaintiff's own negligence contributed to the accident — and even if the plaintiff was primarily responsible for the crash.

The California Supreme Court adopted pure comparative fault in the landmark 1975 decision Li v. Yellow Cab Co., 13 Cal.3d 804 (1975), overturning the prior contributory negligence rule that barred any recovery if the plaintiff was even 1% at fault. The court held that the all-or-nothing nature of contributory negligence was incompatible with a fair judicial system and adopted proportional fault allocation in its place.

Under pure comparative fault, each party to an accident is assigned a fault percentage by the trier of fact (jury or judge), and each party's damages recovery is reduced proportionally. A plaintiff found 30% at fault for a collision recovers 70% of total damages. A plaintiff found 80% at fault recovers 20%. A plaintiff found 99% at fault still recovers 1% of total damages. There is no threshold at which the plaintiff's fault bars recovery entirely — unlike modified comparative fault states that bar recovery when the plaintiff is 50% or 51% at fault or greater.

The practical implications of pure comparative fault are significant. Defendants routinely argue that plaintiffs bore partial responsibility for their own injuries as a negotiating strategy to reduce settlement value. Common comparative fault arguments raised in California personal injury cases include: the plaintiff was speeding, the plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt, the plaintiff was using a phone, the plaintiff was in a restricted area, or the plaintiff chose to walk across a street outside a crosswalk. Each of these arguments, if accepted by a jury, reduces the plaintiff's recovery proportionally but does not eliminate it.

California's pure comparative fault also applies in multi-party cases. When multiple defendants contributed to the plaintiff's injury, each defendant is assigned a fault percentage, and each defendant's liability is proportional to their assigned fault under the principles established in American Motorcycle Assn. v. Superior Court, 20 Cal.3d 578 (1978). Economic damages (medical bills, lost wages) may be apportioned differently from non-economic damages (pain and suffering) in cases involving partially insolvent defendants.

California Insurance Requirements

California is a tort (fault-based) state, meaning injured parties pursue compensation directly from the at-fault driver's liability insurer rather than first seeking compensation from their own personal injury protection (PIP) coverage. California does not have a no-fault insurance system and does not require PIP coverage.

Mandatory minimum liability insurance requirements increased significantly on January 1, 2025 under AB 1107. The new minimums under Vehicle Code section 16056 are:

• $30,000 per person for bodily injury
• $60,000 per accident for bodily injury (all persons combined)
• $15,000 for property damage

Prior to January 1, 2025, the minimums were $15,000/$30,000/$5,000 — limits that had been unchanged since 1967 and were widely acknowledged as inadequate for modern medical costs. Even the new 2025 minimums are insufficient for serious injuries involving hospitalization, surgery, or long-term disability. Drivers who carry only the minimum required coverage create underinsurance exposure for anyone they injure in a serious crash.

Uninsured and underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage is required to be offered by all California auto insurers at limits matching the liability coverage purchased, though the insured may reject it in writing. Approximately 17% of California drivers are uninsured according to Insurance Research Council estimates, making UM/UIM coverage a critical protection for California motorists. UM/UIM coverage applies when the at-fault driver has no insurance (UM) or when the at-fault driver's policy limits are insufficient to fully compensate the injured party's damages (UIM).

Transportation Network Company (TNC) insurance for Uber, Lyft, and similar rideshare platforms is mandated by California Insurance Code section 1758.8. During Period 2 (trip accepted through passenger drop-off), TNCs must provide $1 million per occurrence in primary commercial liability coverage. During Period 1 (app on, no trip accepted), contingent liability coverage of $50,000/$100,000/$25,000 applies.

Commercial motor carriers operating in interstate commerce are subject to federal FMCSA insurance minimums under 49 CFR Part 387. General freight carriers must carry at least $750,000 per occurrence in liability coverage. Carriers transporting hazardous materials must carry $1 million to $5 million depending on the classification of material.

California Insurance Code section 790.03 prohibits unfair claims settlement practices, including failure to acknowledge claims promptly, failure to conduct a reasonable investigation, and failure to tender a fair settlement when liability is reasonably clear. Insurers who violate these provisions may face bad faith liability beyond the policy limits.

Damages and Caps in California

California personal injury law permits recovery of both economic and non-economic damages in virtually all personal injury contexts. Unlike many states that impose broad damage caps, California limits non-economic damages only in the specific context of medical malpractice under the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA).

Economic damages are the measurable financial losses caused by the injury. They are fully recoverable without any cap in California personal injury cases and include:

• Past medical expenses: all reasonable and necessary treatment from the date of injury through settlement or verdict
• Future medical expenses: projected cost of ongoing treatment, surgery, rehabilitation, medication, and assistive devices over the plaintiff's remaining lifetime
• Lost wages: documented income lost during recovery, calculated from pay records and employer verification
• Loss of earning capacity: permanent reduction in the ability to earn income, established through vocational rehabilitation expert testimony
• Property damage: repair or fair market value replacement of vehicles and other damaged property
• Out-of-pocket expenses directly caused by the injury

Non-economic damages compensate for the human costs of the injury that do not reduce to a dollar figure. They are fully recoverable in California personal injury cases without a cap, and include pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, disfigurement, and loss of consortium. California juries are instructed that there is no fixed standard for calculating non-economic damages — the amount is whatever the jury finds fair and reasonable under the evidence.

MICRA cap on medical malpractice non-economic damages: The Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act, enacted in 1975 and substantially amended by AB 35 in 2022, limits non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases. For cases filed on or after January 1, 2023, the cap is $350,000. The cap increases by $40,000 annually through 2033, when it reaches $750,000, and by 2% annually thereafter. The MICRA cap applies only to medical malpractice and does not affect non-economic damages in car accidents, slip and fall cases, truck accidents, or other standard personal injury claims.

Punitive damages are available in California personal injury cases under Civil Code section 3294 when the defendant's conduct constitutes malice, oppression, or fraud. The clear and convincing evidence standard applies. Punitive damages are available against DUI drivers, property owners who knowingly concealed hazards, trucking companies that knowingly violated safety regulations, and similar defendants whose conduct goes beyond simple negligence. California does not cap punitive damages in personal injury cases, though courts review large punitive awards against the constitutional guideposts established in State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (2003).

California Court System for Personal Injury Cases

California operates a unified Superior Court system with one Superior Court per county. Personal injury cases are filed in the Superior Court of the county where the accident occurred, where the defendant resides, or where the defendant does business. California does not have separate trial court levels for personal injury cases — all civil jurisdiction is in the Superior Court, divided into unlimited civil (claims over $35,000) and limited civil (claims $35,000 and under) divisions.

Unlimited civil division handles the vast majority of personal injury cases. There is no upper limit on damages claims in the unlimited civil division. Jury trials are available as of right in personal injury cases. The case management process in California Superior Court involves a case management conference (CMC) at approximately 120 days from filing, discovery cut-offs, mandatory settlement conferences, and trial assignment. Depending on the county, the time from filing to trial assignment ranges from 18 months (smaller counties) to 3 to 5 years (Los Angeles, San Francisco).

Limited civil division handles cases with claims of $35,000 or less. Discovery is more restricted than in the unlimited civil division. Limited civil cases may proceed to bench trial or jury trial, though the process is simplified.

Los Angeles County Superior Court is the largest trial court in the United States by case volume. Personal injury cases are filed at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse (111 N. Hill Street, Los Angeles) or at one of the branch courthouses serving the area where the accident occurred. The personal injury hub court system channels most personal injury cases through designated departments. Los Angeles has among the longest trial wait times in California.

Mandatory settlement conferences are required in California Superior Court before trial in civil cases. Judges or appointed settlement officers conduct these conferences to encourage resolution before the significant cost and uncertainty of trial. The majority of California personal injury cases settle before trial — estimates range from 95% to 97% of all civil cases filed.

Appeals from Superior Court judgments proceed to the California Court of Appeal (six appellate districts), and from there to the California Supreme Court by petition. The Supreme Court accepts only a small fraction of civil cases on review.