As we drive through Los Angeles, certain things are expected of us. Those include to stop at red lights, drive at prudent speeds for the conditions, yield to pedestrians, and not drive while under the influence. If a driver does not meet those expectations, including texting while driving or blowing through a stop sign, that driver is acting negligently.
Negligence, in the most general sense, is the failure to exercise reasonable care. Whether it’s a driver who is not paying attention to the traffic conditions, a property owner who chooses to ignore a spill, or a vehicle manufacturer that decides to release a defective vehicle into the public, negligence holds parties accountable for their actions or their failure to act. In California, to hold a party responsible for negligence, one must demonstrate that that party is legally liable for your injuries.
Neglience Resources in This Article:
- Key Negligence Concepts
- Understanding Negligence
- Select Negligence Theories
- The Psychological and Emotional Impact of Negligence
Key Negligence Concepts
The Legal Definition of Negligence
Negligence in California is articulated in statutes and case law. The California Civil Code, in particular, provides a definition in California Civil Code Section 1714:
Everyone is responsible, not only for the result of his or her willful acts, but also for an injury occasioned to another by his or her want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his or her property or person…
Cal. Civ. Code § 1714
This section codifies the expectation of “ordinary care or skill.” It is through this lens that the law considers a person’s actions, asking what a prudent, law-abiding person would have done under similar circumstances. It also provides an essential framework for elements of a negligence claim: duty, breach, cause, and damages.
The Elements of Negligence
To pursue a negligence claim, your personal injury attorney will need to help you demonstrate the four elements of negligence, assuming they are in dispute in your case. Once proven, they establish that the defendant (i.e. the person, organization, or governmental agency at fault) was negligent and liable for your injury.
Duty of Care
The foundation of a negligence claim is that the defendant owed you a duty of care. For example, all drivers owe a duty of care to drive safely; property owners owe a duty of care to ensure that his or her premises are in a safe condition; vehicle manufacturers owe a duty to produce vehicles that are safe and free from defects.
Breach of Duty
Once the duty of care arises, the next step is to show that the defendant breached that duty of care by acting or failing to act in a way that a reasonably prudent person would have acted under similar circumstances. This concept of a “reasonably prudent person” is the legal standard used to measure how the defendant should have acted in a similar situation. For example, if a reasonable person would have stopped at the red light instead of barreling through it, then the defendant’s failure to stop constitutes a breach of the duty of care.
Causation
Proving causation means showing that it was more likely than not that the defendant’s actions or inactions reasonably contributed to the harm. This is so even if the defendant’s negligence combined with another factor to cause harm. A defendant cannot avoid responsibility just because some other person, condition, or event was also a factor in causing harm.
Damages
The fourth and final element of a negligence claim is damages. Specifically, the nature and extent of the harm suffered as a result of the defendant’s negligence. This harm can take many forms, including physical injuries, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, lost income, medical expenses, or property damages.
Understanding Negligence
In this section:
- Essential Terms
- The Procedural Basics of Negligence Actions
- Case Focus: Pannu v. Land Rover North America, Inc.
Negligence in a general sense is the failure to take proper care. Part of what your attorney can help you with is to navigate the law and determine how the facts of your case fit into the law.
Essential Terms
To fully appreciate the intricacies of the laws which provide for the recovery of damages due to one’s negligence, one should be familiar with some of the terminology used by legal professionals to discuss and litigate such cases.
Tort Law
A tort is defined as a civil wrong that causes someone else to suffer harm. Negligence is one of the primary categories of tort law, focusing on unintentional harm caused by a failure to act as a reasonable person would have done so in similar circumstances.
Reasonable Person Standard
Negligence is the failure to use reasonable care to prevent harm to oneself or to others. A person can be negligent by acting or by failing to act. A person is negligent if that person does something that a reasonably careful person would not do in a similar situation or fails to do something that a reasonably careful person would do in a similar situation.
Causation
A substantial factor in causing harm is a factor that a reasonable person would consider to have contributed to the harm. It does not have to be the only cause of the harm. When it comes to establishing causation, one needs to establish that it is more likely than not that the defendant’s actions (or lack thereof) were a “substantial factor” in causing harm. This is true even if multiple causes contributed to the injury since the substantial factor test provides a comprehensive analysis which allows a defendant to be responsible for the harm, even if he, she, or it was not the sole cause of the harm.
Failure to Act
California law recognizes that liability can also arise from a failure to act. For example, if a landlord fails to provide adequate heating, causing a tenant to use a gas stove for warmth and a result sustains burn injuries, that failure to act can constitute negligence.
Negligence Per Se
Where a statute establishes a defendant’s duty, proof of the violation of the statute raises a presumption of negligence. This rule is generally known as the doctrine of negligence per se. An example includes a driver’s violation of the Vehicle Code.
Res Ipsa Loquitur
The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable where the accident is of such a nature that it can be said, in the light of past experience, that it probably was the result of negligence by someone and that the defendant is probably the one responsible. Under this doctrine, a defendant is negligent when plaintiff’s harm ordinarily would not have happened unless someone was negligent, that the harm was caused by something that only the defendant controlled, and that plaintiff’s voluntary actions did not cause or contribute to the event that harmed plaintiff.
The Procedural Basics of Negligence Actions
Litigating a negligence case in California can entail a series of procedural steps, each of which can help the injured party reach a successful outcome.
Filing a Lawsuit
The legal process begins in court when the injured party files a lawsuit. Generally speaking, this document must:
- Be filed in a court with the authority to hear the case (jurisdiction) and in a place connected to where the collision occurred or where the defendant resides or does business (venue);
- Provides some information about the defendant’s failure to exercise due care, the breach of that duty, and how that breach caused injuries;
- Comply with California’s statute of limitations for negligence claims—typically two years from the date of injury.
The Discovery and Trial Process
After the claim is filed, the case proceeds through a number of stages. Those stages include the following:
Discovery — The parties exchange information through document requests and interrogatories. The parties also take depositions.
Pre-trial motions — The parties file pre-trial motions, including motions for summary judgment (generally used to dismiss the case) or motions in limine (used to exclude evidence).
Trial — If the case goes to trial, the following occurs:
- Jury selection, which typically involves selecting impartial jurors through voir dire.
- Opening statements, where the two sides present an overview of their cases to the jury.
- Presentation of evidence, consisting of witness testimony, physical evidence, and expert opinion.
- Closing arguments, in which the parties summarize their evidence and demonstrate why the jury should find in his or her favor.
- Jury deliberation and verdict, where the jury deliberates and then returns a verdict that sometimes determines liability (if it is in dispute) and, if applicable, the amount of damages.
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
Before or during litigation, the parties may also engage in mediation or arbitration as a means of trying to resolve the case without going to trial. ADR is often encouraged by California courts as a way to save time and resources.
Case Focus: Pannu v. Land Rover North America, Inc.
The 2011 California Court of Appeal decision in Pannu v. Land Rover set important precedence in automotive product liability cases. Plaintiff Sukhsagar Pannu brought his case against Land Rover due to the catastrophic injuries he suffered after his SUV rolled over and the roof crushed. After a lengthy trial, the trier of fact returned a verdict against Land Rover of over $21,000,000.00 for the defective Discovery SUV that Land Rover designed, manufactured, distributed, and sold to Mr. Pannu.
Clarifying Standards for Defective Design
One of the central tenets of the case was the application of two tests for evaluating vehicle safety: the “consumer expectation” test, which assesses whether a product meets ordinary consumer safety standards; and the “risk-benefit” test, which weighs the benefits of the design against its hazards and explores possible safer alternatives.
Establishing Legal Precedent
The appellate court’s decision to uphold the verdict against Land Rover not only validated the application of these tests in an automotive product liability action, but also set a standard for their application in future cases.
Select Negligence Theories
In this section:
- Comparative Negligence
- Gross Negligence
- Negligent Hiring, Supervision, or Retention
- Providing Alcoholic Beverages to Minors
- Standard of Care for Minors
- Case Focus: Ekbatani v. State of California
Comparative Negligence
In California, even if both the defendant and the injured party are negligent, the injured party can still recover damages from the defendant for his, her, or its share of the negligence which contributed to the harm. This concept is known as comparative negligence.
Comparative Negligence allows for the recovery of damages based on the percentage of responsibility the negligent party bears for the general damages. This rule attempts a balanced approach for cases where multiple persons or entities are at fault.
That being said, there are two types of comparative fault systems that are used in the United States:
- Pure comparative fault: Under this system, the net amount the injured party receives is based on the defendant(s) or other parties percentage of fault. California is a pure comparative state.
- Modified comparative fault: In a state which follows a modified comparative fault system, the plaintiff can recover his or her damages awarded by the trier of fact only if the plaintiff is less than 50% at fault. California does not follow this system.
Gross Negligence
Gross negligence is the failure to exercise any care or an extreme departure from what a reasonably careful person would have done in the same situation to prevent harm to oneself or to others. A person can be grossly negligent by acting or by failing to act.
Negligent Hiring, Supervision, or Retention
An entity may also be negligent if it knew or should have known that hiring the employee created a particular risk or hazard and that particular harm materializes. Liability for negligent hiring and supervision is based upon the reasoning that if a company hires individuals with characteristics which might pose a danger to customers or other employees, the enterprise should bear the loss caused by the wrongdoing of its incompetent or unfit employees.
Providing Alcoholic Beverages to Minors
A defendant can also be negligent for the harm he or she caused because he or she gave alcoholic beverages to a minor while the minor was at the defendant’s home. In such situations, the minor may sue for the minor’s own injuries, or a third person may sue for injuries caused by the minor.
Standard of Care for Minors
Children are judged by a special subjective standard. They are only required to exercise that degree of care expected of children of like age, experience, and intelligence. An exception to this reduced standard of care may be found if the minor was engaging in an adult activity, such as driving. In the eyes of the law, children under the age of five are incapable of acting negligently.
Case Focus: Ekbatani v. State of California
In 2012, Amir Ekbatani was riding his motorcycle on Pacific Coast Highway when a taxi driver failed to yield at an intersection and hit him, causing injuries that led to his leg being amputated. After years of litigation and a lengthy jury trial, our office proved that the State of California bore the majority of fault for allowing a dangerous intersection to exist in the area of the crash. The trier of fact compensated Ekbatani $35,000,000.
The Psychological and Emotional Impact of Negligence
In California, negligence can cause the injured party to suffer both economic and non-economic damages. “Pain and suffering” is a trite phrase used in legal circles, but the emotional and mental impact of a negligent act is not trivial. There can be physical injury associated with the harm and almost always psychological injury.
Support and Resources for Victims
Some persons suffer long-standing psychological injuries from the trauma, which include post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). PTSD symptoms include:
- Flashbacks
- Nervousness
- Avoiding certain situations
- Anxiety and Depression
A mental health professional can help an injured party manage the symptoms stemming from psychological harm.
Trauma and Recovery
Life after trauma can be extremely challenging. It is sometimes sadly the ones we trust the most (i.e. teachers, coaches) who commit the most negligent and egregious acts. Making sure that an injured party receives the proper care can certainly help reduce the effect of the trauma and assist in the recovery process.
Contact Mardirossian Akaragian LLP
You do not have have to go through this process alone. With more than 40 years of combined experience and hundreds of millions of dollars collected in negligence cases, our attorneys are focused on recovering the maximum compensation on your behalf, whether through settlement or trial. Led by our award-winning attorneys, Garo Mardirossian and Armen Akaragian, we are prepared to provide you with the aggressive representation and personalized legal guidance you need.
Schedule Your Free Negligence Case Evaluation
Article By
ARMEN AKARAGIAN
Admitted to practice in 2006, Armen has arbitrated, tried, and settled several cases which have resulted in multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements.
Sources cited in this article:
- What Are the Elements of Negligence? – FindLaw
- What Exactly Does Negligence Mean In California? – HG.org
- CACI No. 430. Causation: Substantial Factor – Justia
- California Negligence Law: FAQ – FindLaw
- Comparative Negligence – Cornell Law
- Can You Recover Damages for PTSD After an Accident? – Enjuris
