How Does Comparative Fault Affect a Wrongful Death Claim in California?

California's pure comparative fault system applies to wrongful death claims, meaning that if the deceased was partially responsible for the accident that caused their death, the surviving family's recovery is reduced in proportion to the decedent's percentage of fault. Even if the deceased was found mostly at fault, the family can still recover the remaining percentage of their damages, with one important exception for cases involving uninsured decedents.

How Does California's Pure Comparative Fault Rule Work in Wrongful Death Cases?

California Civil Code Section 1714 and the Li v. Yellow Cab rule establish that fault is apportioned among all parties, including the deceased, and each party is responsible only for their proportionate share of the total damages.

• If the decedent was 30% at fault for a crash worth $1 million in wrongful death damages, the family recovers $700,000
• If the decedent was 70% at fault, the family still recovers 30% of total damages rather than nothing
• Pure comparative fault imposes no minimum threshold for recovery, unlike Nevada's 51% bar
• The jury assigns fault percentages to all parties based on the evidence presented at trial

Who Bears the Burden of Proving the Decedent's Comparative Fault?

The defendant carries the burden of introducing evidence of the decedent's comparative fault at trial, and plaintiffs have the right to contest and minimize that assignment through their own evidence.

• Defense attorneys frequently argue that the decedent was speeding, distracted, or violated a traffic law that contributed to the crash
• Police reports, physical evidence, eyewitness accounts, and accident reconstruction experts all bear on the fault allocation
• Survivors can introduce evidence of the defendant's primary role, the decedent's safe driving record, and favorable road conditions to counter fault arguments
• Expert testimony is often essential in disputed-fault wrongful death cases to provide objective analysis of causation

How Does Comparative Fault Interact With Wrongful Death Damage Categories?

The comparative fault reduction applies to the total wrongful death award, meaning it proportionally reduces both economic and non-economic damages across all surviving claimants.

• Lost financial support, lost household services, and funeral expenses are all reduced by the decedent's fault percentage
• Non-economic damages including loss of companionship, care, and moral support are reduced by the same percentage
• Survival action damages, which belong to the estate rather than the survivors, are also subject to comparative fault reduction
• If multiple defendants share fault, each pays only their proportionate share, not the full reduced award

What Is the Exception for Uninsured Drivers in California Wrongful Death Cases?

California Vehicle Code Section 3333.4 bars uninsured drivers from recovering non-economic damages in personal injury cases, but its application to wrongful death claims requires careful legal analysis.

• If the deceased was driving uninsured at the time of the fatal crash, the estate's survival action may be limited to economic damages only
• The wrongful death claim brought by surviving family members is a separate cause of action and may not be subject to the same bar
• Courts in California have not uniformly resolved every aspect of the uninsured motorist bar's application to wrongful death
• An experienced wrongful death attorney can evaluate whether this provision affects your specific case

Comparative fault arguments in wrongful death cases can significantly reduce the family's recovery if not aggressively challenged. The wrongful death attorneys at Avian Law Group build the evidence needed to minimize fault attributions against the deceased. We serve families throughout California, Arizona, and Nevada. Contact us for a free consultation today.

‍