Comparative fault is a negligence rule according to which parties can share fault for one single accident, and the plaintiff can still receive compensation. According to California Civil Code Section 1714 every person is responsible for intentional acts he commit, and injuries that arise because of his acts.
California is a pure comparative fault state, where a plaintiff is entitled for compensation regardless of his percentage of fault. Thus, in case the courts finds a plaintiff guilty for 85% in an accident he will still be awarded some compensation. In a modified rule state, a plaintiff usually cannot exceed a certain degree of fault.
The rule of comparative fault is based on a public policy of holding people legally liable for their actions. In case a person was injured partly because of his own negligence and partly because of the negligence of other people, he should not be totally barred from bringing a claim.
According to CACI 405 in case the defendant claims that plaintiff’s own negligence contributed to his harm he must be able prove the following elements:
In case the defendant proves all the above mentioned elements, the plaintiff’s damages will be reduced by the jury’s determination of the percentage of his responsibility. According to CACI 406 the percentages must be total 100 percent when dividing up fault among the plaintiffs, defendants, and any non-parties.
The Court or jury will assign a percentage of fault to each party involved in the accident. Once the percentages of fault are assigned, each party will be responsible for a percentage of his medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other financial damages, which are equal to the percentage assigned to that party.
In case when two or more defendants are responsible for the plaintiff’s injuries, he can recover damages from either or both of the defendants. This is called joint and several liability. Joint and several liability is applicable to economic damages, including medical expenses, loss of income, property damage and loss of earning capacity. The plaintiff can also recover pain and suffering.
As stated above, California is a comparative fault state, which allows the plaintiff to recover damages even if he shares the fault for accident. Contributory negligence is a harsher rule, which usually provides that in case the plaintiff is negligent in causing his own injury, he cannot get any compensation. The majority of states use some version of comparative fault, either modified comparative negligence or pure comparative fault. Some states follow a combination of both types of negligence laws.
Truck accidents, often resulting in serious injuries and fatalities, have a profound impact on road safety. Preventing truck accidents is…
In the world of transportation, the trucking industry serves as a backbone for the movement of goods across the country.…
Truck accidents can have horrific results, including serious injuries, fatalities, and substantial legal repercussions. A number of well-known truck accident…
With its ability to move cargo over long distances and maintain the flow of the supply chain, the trucking industry…
Since we share the road with an increasing number of commercial trucks, it becomes imperative to understand the challenges faced…
Truck accidents are not just confined to traffic regulations. They often traverse into the complex territory of criminal liability. Understanding…