Pedestrian Accidents
Attorney in California

Pedestrian struck in crosswalk where Vehicle Code § 21950 grants right-of-way. Driver liability almost always clear; comparative fault arguments typically limited. Most common scenario in urban pedestrian cases.

Pedestrian struck outside crosswalk. Comparative fault rules apply, but California's pure comparative negligence still allows substantial recovery when driver negligence (speeding, distraction, inattention) is established. Many 'jaywalking' cases settle at 70-85% pedestrian recovery.

Pedestrian struck in parking lots, garages, or driveway aprons. Drivers owe ordinary care everywhere — private property doesn't reduce duty. Often involves premises liability claims against the property owner when lighting, signage, or speed control was inadequate.

Vehicle Code § 22352 requires reduced speeds in school zones; violations are negligence per se. Often involves children whose age affects comparative fault analysis under California's child-standard-of-care rule (Christensen v. Royal School Dist.).

Driver flees scene. Pedestrian's own UM coverage applies as if the unidentified driver were uninsured. Identification leads (security footage, witnesses, vehicle debris) often establish the driver later.

DUI driver strikes pedestrian. Strong liability cases often supporting punitive damages under Civil Code § 3294 (malice/oppression standard). Criminal DUI charges create collateral estoppel benefits in civil case.

Intersection without traffic signals or stop signs. Default right-of-way rules under Vehicle Code § 21800 apply; pedestrians retain right-of-way at unmarked crosswalks (extensions of sidewalks).

Drivers must yield right-of-way to pedestrians in any marked crosswalk or any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection. Vehicle Code defines unmarked crosswalks broadly — any extension of a sidewalk across a street qualifies.

Drivers approaching an intersection or crosswalk must yield to pedestrians who are within the crosswalk or close enough to be in danger. Driver inattention is not a defense — drivers must use ordinary care to detect pedestrians.

Even pedestrians outside crosswalks have legal protection — Vehicle Code § 21954 imposes a duty on drivers to use ordinary care to avoid pedestrians. Drivers cannot create hazards even with pedestrian noncompliance.

Reduced speed limits in school zones (25 mph when children are present). Violations are negligence per se in pedestrian cases involving children.

California allows pedestrian recovery even when pedestrian was partially at fault — damages reduced by pedestrian's percentage of fault. Pedestrian-versus-driver fault disputes are common but rarely bar recovery entirely.

California pedestrian accident PI claims must be filed within 2 years. Government claims (against highway agencies, public transit) require 6-month administrative claim under Gov § 911.2.

Claims against government entities for dangerous roadway conditions (inadequate crosswalk markings, missing signals, poor lighting) require proof of dangerous condition, government notice, and causation. 6-month administrative deadline is strict.

Soft-tissue injuries combined with broken bones requiring conservative treatment. Settlement covers medical bills, lost wages, and pain/suffering. Often requires UM/UIM coverage above the at-fault driver's minimum policy.

Open reduction internal fixation for fractures, ACL reconstruction, single-level spinal fusion. Future medical needs often add substantial future-cost value.

Multiple body parts injured, mild-to-moderate TBI, internal injuries. Catastrophic injury baseline in pedestrian cases drives recoveries above equivalent vehicle accidents.

Permanent total disability or near-total disability. Life-care plans, future medical costs, and permanent earning capacity loss produce seven- and eight-figure recoveries when liability is clear.

Surviving heirs recover under CCP § 377.60 — economic losses plus non-economic damages. DUI fatalities frequently include punitive damages under Civ § 3294.

Cases involving inadequate crosswalk markings, missing signals, or poor lighting may add government defendants under Gov Code § 835. Strict 6-month administrative claim deadline.

California's pure comparative negligence allows substantial recovery even when pedestrian was technically jaywalking. Vehicle Code § 21954 imposes driver duty to use ordinary care regardless. Most jaywalking cases settle at 70-85% pedestrian recovery.

Drivers have a duty to use ordinary care to detect pedestrians under all conditions. We use accident reconstruction to document the driver's actual visibility — most 'pedestrian not visible' arguments fail when reconstruction shows the driver had reaction time.

Pedestrian intoxication doesn't bar recovery — it affects comparative fault percentage. We document driver fault through speed, distraction, and right-of-way violations, often establishing the driver's fault dominates regardless of pedestrian state.

Pedestrian accidents often produce TBI symptoms that emerge weeks or months after the accident. We refuse early settlement until neuropsychological evaluation is complete and all damage components are documented.

California's child standard of care (Christensen v. Royal School Dist.) holds children to a reduced standard. We argue this aggressively in school-zone and neighborhood pedestrian cases involving minors.

Drivers have independent duty to use ordinary care regardless of road conditions. When inadequate lighting or signage contributed, we pursue both the driver and the government entity — Prop 51 allocation among defendants produces full recovery.