How California’s Comparative Fault Law Affects Wrongful Death Settlements

Wrongful death settlements in California offer families compensation when a loved one dies due to another party’s negligence or misconduct, such as in traffic collisions, workplace accidents, or medical malpractice. California’s comparative fault law, however, can reduce these settlements if the deceased contributed to the incident, making it critical to understand its impact. This article explores how comparative fault influences wrongful death settlements, key legal considerations, example cases, and steps to take after a tragic loss to pursue fair compensation.

How Comparative Fault Impacts Wrongful Death Settlements

California’s pure comparative fault rule adjusts compensation based on the deceased’s share of responsibility for the incident that caused their death. Key impacts include:

Proportional Reduction: The settlement amount is reduced by the percentage of fault attributed to the deceased. For instance, a $1 million award with 20% fault results in $800,000.
Common Fault Scenarios: Fault may be assigned if the deceased ignored safety protocols, disregarded warnings, or acted recklessly, such as a cyclist not wearing a helmet.
Defendant Defenses: Defendants often emphasize the deceased’s actions to reduce liability, necessitating robust evidence to highlight the defendant’s negligence.
Recovery Regardless of Fault: Even if the deceased was primarily at fault (e.g., 90%), survivors can still recover damages, though the award is significantly reduced, unlike states with stricter fault rules.

An experienced attorney can counter fault claims with evidence to minimize reductions and maximize compensation.

Legal Considerations in Wrongful Death Claims with Comparative Fault

Navigating comparative fault in wrongful death settlements requires understanding California’s legal framework for liability and damages. Key considerations include:

Pure Comparative Fault System: California allows recovery regardless of the deceased’s fault percentage, with damages reduced proportionally, as defined in the California Civil Code.
Establishing Defendant Liability: Proving the defendant’s negligence caused the death, using evidence like accident reports or expert testimony, helps shift focus from the deceased’s actions.
Eligible Claimants: Spouses, domestic partners, children, or certain dependents can file claims, seeking economic (e.g., lost income) and non-economic (e.g., emotional distress) damages, all subject to fault adjustments.
Statute of Limitations: Claims must be filed within two years of the death, or six months for public entity claims, impacting recovery if deadlines are missed.
Burden of Proof on Fault: Defendants must prove the deceased’s fault to reduce damages, while plaintiffs must provide evidence to limit fault attribution.

An attorney can strategically build a case to reduce the deceased’s fault percentage and protect settlement value.

Example Wrongful Death Cases Affected by Comparative Fault

The following 10 hypothetical examples illustrate how comparative fault affects wrongful death settlements in California, based on typical outcomes:

Case Example 1: Pedestrian Hit by Car: A pedestrian died crossing against a signal, struck by a speeding driver. The attorney used traffic footage to prove driver negligence, securing a $1 million settlement, but 30% fault for jaywalking reduced it to $700,000.
Case Example 2: Construction Site Fall: A worker died falling from a scaffold lacking guardrails. Contractor negligence was proven, yielding a $1.5 million settlement, but 15% fault for not using a harness reduced it to $1.275 million.
Case Example 3: Medical Malpractice Error: A patient died from a surgical mistake, but the hospital claimed non-compliance with pre-surgery instructions. Weak evidence led to 40% fault, reducing a $600,000 settlement to $360,000. A stronger case could have yielded $540,000.
Case Example 4: Motorcycle Crash: A motorcyclist died in a collision with a drunk driver. The attorney proved gross negligence, securing a $2 million settlement, but 10% fault for not wearing a helmet reduced it to $1.8 million.
Case Example 5: Bicycle Accident: A cyclist died after veering into traffic, hit by a distracted driver. Driver negligence was established, but 50% fault for the cyclist’s maneuver cut a $800,000 settlement to $400,000.
Case Example 6: Workplace Explosion: A worker died in a factory explosion due to safety violations. The attorney secured a $1.2 million settlement, but 25% fault for ignoring safety protocols reduced it to $900,000.
Case Example 7: Public Transit Crash: A passenger died in a bus crash caused by a fatigued driver. Transit agency liability was proven, but 20% fault for not wearing a seatbelt reduced a $900,000 settlement to $720,000.
Case Example 8: Defective Product Death: A consumer died from a faulty appliance fire. The manufacturer was liable, but 15% fault for improper use cut a $700,000 settlement to $595,000.
Case Example 9: Slip and Fall Death: An elderly person died after falling on a wet store floor. Negligence was shown, but 35% fault for ignoring a warning sign reduced a $500,000 settlement to $325,000.
Case Example 10: Boating Accident: A passenger died in a boat crash due to operator recklessness. The attorney secured a $1.3 million settlement, but 5% fault for not wearing a life jacket reduced it to $1.235 million.

These examples demonstrate how comparative fault impacts settlement amounts and the importance of evidence in limiting fault attribution.

Steps to Take After a Wrongful Death to Address Comparative Fault

To protect your legal rights and pursue a fair wrongful death settlement under comparative fault rules, take these steps:

Seek Legal Support Immediately: Contact a wrongful death attorney to assess your case and develop strategies to counter comparative fault claims while managing your loss.
Collect Evidence: Gather accident reports, witness statements, or video footage to prove the defendant’s negligence and reduce the deceased’s fault.
Document Losses: Keep records of funeral expenses, medical bills, and the deceased’s financial contributions to support damage claims despite fault reductions.
Identify Liable Parties: Work with your attorney to pinpoint responsible parties, such as drivers, employers, or manufacturers, to emphasize their liability.
Act Within Deadlines: Consult an attorney to meet California’s filing deadlines and pursue compensation for financial and emotional damages.

Why You Need a Wrongful Death Attorney

California’s comparative fault law can drastically reduce wrongful death settlements if the deceased is found partially responsible, and defendants often exploit this to minimize payouts. An experienced personal injury attorney can gather robust evidence, challenge fault assignments, and negotiate or litigate to secure fair compensation for financial losses, funeral expenses, and emotional suffering. At The Law Office of Melinda J. Helbock, A.P.C., our dedicated team has extensive experience handling wrongful death cases throughout California.

If you have lost a loved one due to someone’s negligence, don’t delay in seeking legal help. Contact The Law Office of Melinda J. Helbock, A.P.C. today for a free consultation.

Request a Confidential Legal Consultation