What the claim involves
The Vehicle Code puts the duty of care on the driver, in the crosswalk and everywhere else a pedestrian is on the road.
A driver must yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, must exercise all due care when approaching a pedestrian in a crosswalk, reducing speed or taking any other action necessary to safeguard the pedestrian (Vehicle Code § 21950(a), (c)), and may not pass a vehicle that has stopped at a crosswalk to let a pedestrian cross (§ 21951). A driver facing a green light, including one turning, must yield to pedestrians lawfully within the intersection or an adjacent crosswalk (§ 21451(a)). Not every crosswalk is painted: the DMV’s handbook reminds drivers that pedestrians have the right-of-way in marked or unmarked crosswalks, and to yield even when the “Don’t Walk” light is flashing. A pedestrian crossing anywhere else must yield to vehicles so near as to be an immediate hazard (§ 21954(a)), but that duty does not relieve the driver of the duty to exercise due care for the safety of any pedestrian upon a roadway (§ 21954(b)). The 2023 law often called the Freedom to Walk Act (Assembly Bill 2147) limited when police may stop a pedestrian for a crossing violation; it did not repeal the rules or anyone’s duty of care. Under California’s comparative-fault rule, a pedestrian’s share of fault, if any, reduces the recovery; it does not bar the claim.
Kyle Scott Law represents pedestrians struck by cars, trucks, and rideshare vehicles from its Tustin office, across Orange County: on Beach Boulevard, Harbor Boulevard, and Pacific Coast Highway, at signalized intersections, in shopping-center lots, and on residential streets, and it represents the families of pedestrians who did not survive. The firm obtains the police or CHP report, finds the intersection and business video before it is overwritten, documents the crosswalk markings or their absence, the signal timing, the lighting, and the sight lines, and reads every policy that may apply, including the pedestrian’s own uninsured-motorist coverage when the driver fled or carried too little insurance. When an insurer blames the pedestrian or will not offer a fair settlement, the firm files suit in the Orange County Superior Court in Santa Ana and prepares the case for trial.
What the driver owed
In a marked crosswalk, or an unmarked one at an intersection, the driver had to yield and to slow down or do whatever else was necessary to protect the pedestrian (Vehicle Code § 21950(a), (c)); at a green light, including on a turn, the driver had to yield to a pedestrian lawfully in the intersection or an adjacent crosswalk (§ 21451(a)); and everywhere on the roadway, the driver had to use due care for any pedestrian (§ 21954(b)). When a driver breaks one of these rules and the violation causes the kind of harm the rule exists to prevent, California presumes the driver failed to use due care, subject to rebuttal (Evidence Code § 669). A driver who says the pedestrian came out of nowhere has raised a question about sight lines, speed, and attention, which the evidence answers.
Crossing outside a crosswalk
A pedestrian who crosses mid-block must yield to vehicles close enough to be an immediate hazard (Vehicle Code § 21954(a)), may not cross between two adjacent signalized intersections except in a crosswalk (§ 21955(a)), must obey a pedestrian signal, finishing the crossing before a countdown ends (§ 21456), and may be subject to a local ordinance against crossing outside crosswalks (§ 21961(a)). Since January 1, 2023, Assembly Bill 2147 bars police from stopping a pedestrian for those violations unless a reasonably careful person would realize there is an immediate danger of a collision, but each section still says the pedestrian must use due care for the pedestrian’s own safety and the driver must use due care for any pedestrian within the roadway. An insurer can still argue that a mid-block crossing was partly the pedestrian’s fault; whether anyone was cited does not settle it.
Shared fault
California follows comparative fault: if the pedestrian’s own carelessness contributed to the injury, the recovery is reduced by the pedestrian’s share of fault, and a driver whose negligence was a cause remains responsible for the driver’s share. Because the shares are contested, the early evidence decides them: where the pedestrian was, the signal phase, the lighting, the driver’s speed and attention, and the sight lines. The presumption in Evidence Code § 669 can be argued against a pedestrian who broke a pedestrian rule as well as against a driver, so the firm gathers the evidence of what each person did before the insurer settles on its version.
Dangerous crossings, signals, and sidewalks
Some pedestrian injuries involve public property: a crosswalk with no lighting, a signal that does not give enough time to cross, a faded or missing crosswalk, or a broken sidewalk. A city, the County, or the State is liable for a dangerous condition of its property if the injured person proves that the condition caused the injury and created a reasonably foreseeable risk of that kind of injury, and that either a public employee’s negligent or wrongful act created the condition or the entity had notice of it in time to protect against it (Government Code § 835). Public entities have statutory defenses, and a written government claim must generally be presented within six months (§ 911.2), so these facts are investigated first.
Cases the firm reviews
Common pedestrian accidents matters.
Information that can matter
A strong claim starts with preserved evidence.
The useful records vary by case. The initial review identifies what exists, what may need to be requested, and what should be preserved before it is lost.
Legal guides
Answers to common pedestrian accidents questions.
Common questions
Questions about pedestrian accidents claims.
I was hit outside a crosswalk. Can I still bring a claim?
Yes. A pedestrian crossing outside a crosswalk must yield to vehicles close enough to be an immediate hazard (Vehicle Code § 21954(a)), but a driver must use due care for any pedestrian on the roadway (§ 21954(b)), and a driver who was speeding, distracted, or not watching the road can be responsible to a pedestrian who was crossing mid-block. If you share some of the fault, California’s comparative-fault rule reduces your recovery rather than barring it.
Is jaywalking legal in California now?
Not exactly. The law that took effect on January 1, 2023, Assembly Bill 2147, stops police from pulling a pedestrian over for specified crossing violations unless a reasonably careful person would realize there is an immediate danger of a collision. It left the crossing rules in place, including a pedestrian’s duty outside a crosswalk to yield to vehicles that are an immediate hazard (Vehicle Code § 21954(a)), and an insurer can still point to those rules when fault is argued. Whether or not anyone was cited, the evidence of what each person did decides the fault.
The driver had a green light and turned into me. Who is at fault?
A driver facing a green light, including one turning, must yield to pedestrians lawfully within the intersection or an adjacent crosswalk (Vehicle Code § 21451(a)), and a pedestrian facing a green light or a walk signal may cross within the crosswalk, yielding only to vehicles already lawfully in the intersection (§§ 21451(c), 21456(a)). The questions become whether the pedestrian was in the crosswalk, what the pedestrian signal showed, and whether the driver looked before turning. Intersection video and the city’s signal-timing records usually answer them.
What if the driver drove away?
Report it to the police right away. A driver involved in a crash that injures someone must stop at the scene (Vehicle Code § 20001(a)). Your own uninsured-motorist coverage, or a household member’s, may cover a pedestrian struck by an unidentified driver, subject to the policy and the statute’s conditions, which include physical contact with the vehicle, a report to the police within 24 hours, and a sworn statement to the insurer within 30 days (Insurance Code § 11580.2(b)). Nearby video, debris, and paint transfer can also identify the car.
The crosswalk was dark, or the signal did not give me enough time. Can the city be responsible?
It can be, if the facts fit Government Code § 835: a dangerous condition of public property that caused the injury and created a reasonably foreseeable risk of it, and that a public employee negligently created or that the entity had notice of in time to protect against. Public entities have statutory defenses, and a written government claim must generally be presented within six months (§ 911.2), so the firm investigates the lighting, the signal timing, the maintenance records, and prior complaints early. A private owner may be responsible for a parking lot or driveway it controls.
Does the police report decide who was at fault?
No. The report and any citation are evidence, and insurers read them, but they are one officer’s conclusion from what was available at the scene. Insurers and courts consider the whole record: the video, the witnesses, the signal timing, the physical evidence, and the medical records. A report that blames the pedestrian is a reason to investigate, not a reason to stop.
How long do I have to bring a pedestrian claim?
Most injury lawsuits must be filed within two years (Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1). A claim against a city, the County, or the State, over a dangerous crossing or a crash with a government vehicle, generally requires a written government claim within six months (Government Code § 911.2), and certain uninsured-motorist claims require a lawsuit, an agreement, or a formal arbitration demand within two years (Insurance Code § 11580.2(i)). Negotiating with an insurer generally does not extend any of these deadlines, and the video that proves the case can be gone in days.
This page provides general information, not legal advice. A consultation is needed to evaluate the facts, deadlines, parties, and law that may apply to a specific matter.
Related practice areas