Filing an Injury Claim in California: Generous on Fault, Ruthless on Deadlines

California’s injury system is strangely split. On the question of fault, it is about the most forgiving state in the country — you can generally recover something even if the accident was mostly your fault. On certain deadlines, it is one of the least forgiving, with some claims expiring in months rather than years. Knowing which side of that split your situation falls on is half the battle.

The fault rule California invented

Most states cut injured people off once their share of the blame crosses a line — typically 50% or 51%. California has no line at all. In Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804, the California Supreme Court threw out the old all-or-nothing contributory negligence doctrine and adopted pure comparative negligence: your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault, whatever that percentage is. Even a person found mostly responsible for their own accident can generally still recover the remaining share from the other party.

The practical takeaway is simple: do not disqualify yourself. The single most common reason people never look into a claim is the belief that the accident was partly — or mostly — their fault, so there is no point. In California, that belief is legally wrong.

That said, the percentage still matters enormously, because every point of fault assigned to you discounts what you recover. Adjusters know this, which is why an early, confident phone call telling you the crash was largely your fault is a negotiating position, not a finding. Fault percentages are argued from evidence — police reports, photographs, witness accounts, camera footage — and the opening number an insurer floats is rarely where an evaluated claim lands.

Two years for most claims

For most personal injury lawsuits — car accidents, falls, dog bites, and other negligence claims — California generally allows two years from the date of injury to file suit, under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1. As of 2026 that remains the general rule, and it puts California in the middle of the national pack; you can see how it compares in our state-by-state statute of limitations guide.

Exceptions exist in both directions. The clock can pause in limited situations — for example, claims involving minors often work differently — and some claims run on shorter or differently-structured timelines, as covered below. Which rule applies to a specific set of facts is exactly the kind of question to confirm with a licensed California attorney rather than assume.

The six-month trap: claims against the government

Here is where California turns harsh. If the party you would be claiming against is a public entity — the state, a city, a county, a school district, a transit agency — you generally cannot simply sue within two years. Under Government Code section 911.2, you must first present a written administrative claim to that entity within six months of the injury. If the entity rejects the claim, a separate deadline — generally six months from the rejection notice, under Government Code section 945.6 — controls when you can file suit.

Six months is one of the shortest such windows in the country, and it bites in California more than almost anywhere else, because so much of daily life here happens on public property or around public agencies. Consider how often a California injury involves:

• a state highway or interchange maintained by Caltrans;
• a city sidewalk, crosswalk, or street with a dangerous condition;
• a public bus or light-rail vehicle;
• a public school, park, or government building;
• a county hospital or public employee driving on the job.

Many people quite reasonably assume they have two years, do nothing for a while, and discover the administrative deadline only after it has passed. A late-claim process exists, but relief is discretionary and far from certain. If there is any chance a government entity is involved in your injury, treat the timeline as measured in weeks, not years, and get qualified eyes on it early.

No-fault? Not here

California is not a no-fault state. It runs a traditional at-fault (tort) system: the driver who caused the crash is, through their insurer, generally responsible for the harm. There is no personal injury protection requirement and no injury threshold you must clear before bringing a liability claim, which means fault evidence is central from day one.

One recent change is worth knowing because older articles still get it wrong. Under Senate Bill 1107, effective January 1, 2025, California raised its minimum auto liability coverage for the first time since 1967 — roughly doubling the required bodily-injury limits and tripling the property-damage limit. In plain terms, there is often more insurance available after a crash with a minimally insured driver than there used to be. Serious injuries can still exceed minimum policies quickly, which is why uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage — and a careful search for every applicable policy — matters so much in bigger cases.

Medical malpractice runs on different rails

Claims against health care providers follow their own rules in California, and they differ from ordinary injury claims in two big ways.

1. A different clock. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 340.5, a medical negligence suit must generally be filed within three years of the injury or one year after the patient discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the injury — whichever comes first. That “whichever comes first” structure regularly produces a shorter deadline than people expect.
2. A cap on non-economic damages. California’s long-standing MICRA law caps non-economic damages — pain, suffering, loss of enjoyment — in medical malpractice cases under Civil Code section 3333.2. A 2022 reform (AB 35) replaced the old frozen cap with one that steps up each year through 2033, and the applicable cap is generally the one in effect when the case resolves, not when the malpractice happened. Economic damages, such as medical costs and lost earnings, are not capped.

Outside medical malpractice, California does not impose a general cap on personal injury damages, though specific statutes can affect particular claim types. Again — facts matter, and this is attorney territory.

What this means if you were hurt in California

Two questions do most of the early triage work. First: could any responsible party be a public entity? If yes, your effective deadline may be six months, not two years. Second: have you been assuming your own fault ends the claim? In a pure comparative negligence state, it generally does not. For the condensed version of California’s deadlines and fault rules, our California quick-reference page lays them out in one place.

If you were injured in California and want to know where your situation actually stands, answer a few questions about what happened and we will connect you with a participating law firm that can evaluate the deadlines and fault issues that apply to you. It is free, confidential, and there is no obligation.