Spinal Injury Law in California

Statute of Limitations in California

The general statute of limitations for a spinal cord injury personal injury claim in California is two years from the date of injury under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1. California applies several important exceptions that can shorten or extend this window depending on the identity of the defendant and the circumstances of the injury.

The two-year period begins on the date the injury occurs — the date of the car accident, the workplace fall, or the slip and fall. This is the default rule for the vast majority of spinal injury claims against private defendants.

Government entity exception (six months): When the defendant is a California government entity — a city, county, school district, transit agency, state department, or public university — the Government Claims Act under Government Code section 911.2 requires the injured person to present a written claim to the entity within six months of the date of injury. This six-month window is a jurisdictional prerequisite: failure to file a timely claim bars the subsequent lawsuit entirely, regardless of how meritorious the underlying claim may be. After the government entity rejects the claim (or six months pass without action), the claimant has six months to file the lawsuit.

Discovery rule: California's discovery rule tolls the statute of limitations when the plaintiff did not know and could not reasonably have discovered both the injury and its negligent cause. In spinal cord injury cases this rule applies narrowly: the discovery rule does not apply simply because the plaintiff did not immediately appreciate the legal significance of a known injury. It is most relevant in cases of gradually manifesting spinal injuries — for example, a cervical disc herniation that produces progressive myelopathy symptoms months after a crash.

Minority tolling: When the injured person is a minor at the time of the injury, the two-year statute of limitations is tolled until the minor reaches the age of majority. Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 352, minors have until two years after their 18th birthday to file suit. Government claims for minor plaintiffs must still be presented within six months of the injury, but under Government Code section 912.2, minors have until six months after turning 18 to present the government claim if the minor's parent or guardian failed to timely file one.

Defendant absence tolling: Under Code of Civil Procedure section 351, the two-year period is tolled for any period during which the defendant is absent from California, preventing service of process. This provision is most relevant in cases involving out-of-state trucking companies or individual defendants who have left California.

Comparative Fault in California

California uses a pure comparative fault system for personal injury cases. Under this system, an injured person may recover damages even if they were partially responsible for the accident that caused their spinal cord injury. The total damages award is reduced in proportion to the plaintiff's assigned percentage of fault, but it is never eliminated entirely — even a plaintiff who is 99% at fault may recover 1% of their total damages.

California's pure comparative fault system was established by the California Supreme Court in Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804, which replaced the prior contributory negligence rule that completely barred recovery when the plaintiff was any percentage at fault. The legislative codification of this system is found in Civil Code section 1714, which holds everyone responsible for injuries caused by their lack of ordinary care.

Pure comparative fault stands in contrast to the "modified comparative fault" systems used in many other states, which bar recovery when the plaintiff's fault exceeds 50% or 51%. Under California's pure system, there is no fault threshold that eliminates the right to recover. This makes California one of the most plaintiff-favorable jurisdictions for catastrophic injury claims involving any degree of shared fault.

In spinal cord injury cases, comparative fault arguments by defendants most commonly involve: allegations that the injured person was speeding or violating traffic law at the time of a car accident; that the injured person failed to wear a seatbelt (in vehicle cases); that the injured motorcyclist was lane-splitting unsafely; that the injured person was not wearing a required helmet; or that the injured person failed to observe an obvious hazard in a premises case. Each of these arguments reduces the recovery proportionally but does not bar it.

Proposition 51, enacted in 1986 and codified at Civil Code section 1431.2, modified the joint and several liability rule for non-economic damages. Under Proposition 51, each defendant in a multi-defendant case is liable for economic damages (medical bills, lost wages) on a joint and several basis — meaning any single defendant can be required to pay the full amount — but each defendant is liable for non-economic damages (pain and suffering) only in proportion to their individual percentage of fault. This rule is significant in multi-party spinal injury cases involving a severely at-fault defendant alongside a minimally at-fault defendant.

California Insurance Requirements

California requires all registered motor vehicle owners to maintain minimum liability insurance coverage. Under Vehicle Code section 16056, as amended by SB 1107 effective January 1, 2025, the minimum required coverage is $30,000 for bodily injury or death of one person, $60,000 for bodily injury or death of two or more persons in any one accident, and $15,000 for property damage. These minimums represent a significant increase from the prior $15,000/$30,000/$5,000 limits, but remain grossly insufficient for catastrophic spinal cord injury claims where first-year medical costs alone can exceed $1 million.

Uninsured and underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage: California Insurance Code section 11580.2 requires every auto insurer doing business in California to offer uninsured motorist (UM) and underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage in amounts equal to the bodily injury liability limits of the policy, unless the insured expressly waives higher limits in writing. UM/UIM coverage is the primary financial supplement in spinal injury auto cases when the at-fault driver is uninsured or carries insufficient liability coverage for a catastrophic injury.

Medical payments (MedPay) coverage: California insurers are required to offer MedPay coverage, which pays for medical expenses regardless of fault. MedPay is not required to be purchased by policyholders but must be offered. In catastrophic SCI cases, MedPay provides immediate payment of early medical bills without waiting for liability resolution.

Commercial trucking: Federal FMCSA regulations under 49 CFR Part 387 require commercial carriers in interstate commerce to maintain minimum liability insurance of $750,000 for property carriers and $1 million to $5 million for hazardous material carriers. These federal minimums supersede California's state minimums for covered commercial vehicles and provide a substantially larger initial insurance pool in truck accident SCI cases.

Workers' compensation: California employers are required to maintain workers' compensation insurance under Labor Code section 3700. Workers' compensation insurers provide medical treatment and disability benefits for workplace spinal injuries. The workers' comp insurer holds a reimbursement lien against any third-party civil recovery under Labor Code section 3856.

Damages and Caps in California

California is one of the most favorable states for spinal cord injury plaintiffs with respect to damages. The general rule in California personal injury law is that all compensatory damages — both economic and non-economic — are recoverable without any statutory cap in standard tort cases.

Economic damages: Economic damages in California spinal cord injury cases include all past and future medical expenses (hospital, surgical, rehabilitation, specialist, attendant care, adaptive equipment, and home modification); all past and future lost earnings and diminished earning capacity; and incidental costs related to the injury. Economic damages are never capped in California personal injury cases.

Non-economic damages: Non-economic damages for pain, suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of consortium are also uncapped in California standard personal injury cases under Civil Code section 3333. This distinguishes California from states that have imposed caps on non-economic damages in all personal injury cases. The uncapped nature of California non-economic damages in SCI cases routinely produces the largest component of total damages awards in jury verdicts.

Medical malpractice exception — AB 35: A different rule applies when the spinal cord injury was caused by medical negligence. California's Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) historically limited non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases to $250,000. AB 35, signed in 2022 and effective January 1, 2023, raised the non-economic damage cap to $350,000 for non-death cases and $500,000 for wrongful death cases. These amounts increase annually by $40,000 per year through 2033, after which they are indexed to inflation. The MICRA cap applies only to medical malpractice claims, not to other personal injury cases.

Punitive damages: California Civil Code section 3294 allows punitive damages when the defendant acted with malice, oppression, or fraud. In personal injury cases, punitive damages require clear and convincing evidence of conscious disregard for others' rights or safety. Punitive damages are not subject to a statutory cap in California but are subject to constitutional limits under the federal due process clause. In spinal cord injury cases, punitive damage claims arise most commonly in drunk driving cases, in cases involving deliberate concealment of known safety hazards, and in egregious trucking cases involving documented hours-of-service violations.

Proposition 51 and joint and several liability: As discussed in the comparative fault section, Proposition 51 (Civil Code section 1431.2) limits joint and several liability to economic damages in multi-defendant cases. Each defendant is responsible for non-economic damages only in proportion to their individual percentage of fault. This rule affects settlement strategy in multi-defendant SCI cases.

California Court System for Spinal Injury Cases

Personal injury lawsuits for spinal cord injuries in California are filed in the California Superior Court system. California has 58 counties, each with its own Superior Court. The Superior Court has unlimited civil jurisdiction over cases seeking more than $35,000 in damages. All spinal cord injury cases, which routinely involve millions of dollars in claimed damages, are filed in the unlimited civil division of the appropriate Superior Court.

Venue rules: Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 395, a personal injury case may be filed in any county where the injury occurred, where any defendant resides or has principal offices, or where any defendant is doing business at the time the lawsuit is filed. In practice, spinal injury cases are typically filed in the county where the accident occurred, as that is where witnesses, scene evidence, and the injured person's medical providers are likely to be located.

Major courthouse locations for SCI cases: The largest Superior Court locations for spinal injury litigation in California are the Stanley Mosk Courthouse (111 N. Hill Street, Los Angeles, Los Angeles County), which handles general civil cases in L.A. County; the San Diego Central Courthouse (330 W. Broadway, San Diego, San Diego County); the Santa Clara County Superior Court — Downtown Superior Court (191 N. First Street, San Jose, Santa Clara County); and the Alameda County Superior Court — Rene C. Davidson Courthouse (1225 Fallon Street, Oakland, Alameda County).

Case management and trial timeline: California Superior Court civil cases are subject to mandatory case management requirements under California Rules of Court. Personal injury cases are typically assigned to a judge for case management within 120 days of filing. Trial dates in major urban counties such as Los Angeles and San Francisco are typically set 18 to 36 months after filing, though complex SCI cases with multiple defendants and extensive expert testimony may take longer. Courts in less congested counties may have shorter trial timelines.

Mandatory settlement conferences: California courts routinely require mandatory settlement conferences before trial in civil cases. In major personal injury cases, including spinal cord injury lawsuits, judicially supervised settlement conferences frequently result in resolution before trial. California also has a robust system of private mediation, and most SCI cases are mediated at least once before trial.

Workers' compensation proceedings: Workplace spinal injury workers' compensation claims are handled by the California Division of Workers' Compensation (DWC), an administrative agency separate from the Superior Court system. Workers' compensation disputes are resolved by Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) judges. The civil third-party lawsuit runs separately and simultaneously in the Superior Court.