Negligence
Nearly all vehicle and personal injury accidents are based on the theory that someone’s negligence caused another person’s injury. In California, to win a personal injury case, a plaintiff generally needs to prove three things:
- That the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care;
- That the defendant breached the duty of care; and
- That the defendant’s negligence was a substantial factor in causing the harm.
What is a duty of care?
The California Supreme Court has stated: “Because the application of due care is inherently situational, the amount of care deemed reasonable in any particular case will vary, while at the same time the standard of conduct itself remains constant, i.e., due care commensurate with the risk posed by the conduct taking into consideration all relevant circumstances. If you or someone you love was injured in a car accident and another driver was at fault, please contact our San Diego car accident lawyers that victims trust.
What is a substantial factor in causing the harm?
The term ‘substantial factor’ has not been judicially defined with specificity, and it has been observed that it is ‘neither possible nor desirable to reduce it to any lower terms. The substantial factor standard is relatively broad, requiring only that the contribution of the individual cause be more than negligible or theoretical. Thus, a force that plays only an “infinitesimal” or “theoretical” part in bringing about injury, damage, or loss is not a substantial factor. Still, a minor force that does cause harm is a substantial factor.
California Jury Instruction states: A substantial factor in causing harm is a factor that a reasonable person would consider to have contributed to the harm. It must be more than a remote or trivial factor. It does not have to be the only cause of the harm.
What is the standard of care for minors?
A special subjective standard judges children. They are only required to exercise that degree of care expected of children of like age, experience, and intelligence.
Is the person negligent because they used alcohol or drugs?
A person is not necessarily negligent just because they used alcohol [or drugs]. However, people who drink alcohol [or take drugs] must act just as carefully as those who do not. Mere consumption of alcohol is not negligence in and of itself: “The fact that a person when injured was intoxicated is not evidence of contributory negligence, but it is a circumstance to be considered in determining whether his intoxication contributed to his injury.”
What is gross negligence?
Gross negligence is the lack of care or an extreme departure from what a reasonably careful person would do in the same situation to prevent harm to oneself or others. A person can be grossly negligent by acting or by failing to act. California does not recognize a distinct cause of action for ‘gross negligence’ independent of a statutory basis.
What if the plaintiff was also at fault?
A defendant may claim that the plaintiff’s negligence contributed to their harm. To succeed in this claim, the defendant must prove both of the following:
1. That the Plaintiff was negligent; and
2. The plaintiff’s negligence was a substantial factor in causing their harm.
If the defendant proves both, the plaintiff’s damages are reduced by the jury’s determination of the percentage of the plaintiff’s responsibility. (See CACI 405)
What are the defenses to negligence?
Assumption of Risk. Express assumption occurs when the plaintiff, in advance, expressly consents to relieve the defendant of an obligation of conduct toward him and to take his chances of injury from a known risk arising from what the defendant is to do or leave undone. The result is that under no duty, [the defendant] cannot be charged with negligence.
Sudden Emergency: A person who, without negligence on his part, is suddenly and unexpectedly confronted with peril arising from either the actual presence or the appearance of imminent danger to himself or others is not expected nor required to use the same judgment and prudence that is required of him in the exercise of ordinary care in calmer and more deliberate moments.
Statute of Limitation: A plaintiff’s lawsuit must be filed within two years from when they were harmed and damaged.
