# Can I have a claim if I was partly at fault?

Canonical: https://californiapersonalinjurylaws.com/guides/partly-at-fault/

Reviewed by Andrew (Andy) R. Gillin; publisher reported approval on 2026-11-04. Original review date was not supplied.

## Short answer

You may still have a claim when you share some blame. California generally uses comparative fault: your share of fault can reduce what you recover.

## Hypothetical example

In a simple case with one defendant, a jury finds $100,000 in damages and 20% fault for the injured person. The reduction leaves $80,000 before other limits or deductions.

## How the rule works

Courts use rules called comparative fault to divide blame. The rules for splitting bills may differ from those for pain and other nonfinancial harm. More than one party may owe money.

## A simple shared-fault example

1. **$100,000**: Assume this is the amount of proved damages.
2. **20% your fault**: Reduce the damages by $20,000.
3. **$80,000 remains**: This is before other limits, fees, or payment issues.

Made-up numbers for one defendant. This is not a case estimate. Other legal limits and collection issues may change the result.

## How does comparative fault work?

Comparative fault means that more than one person can share blame. California uses a rule often called pure comparative negligence. In a covered negligence claim, your share of fault can reduce your damages rather than bar the whole claim.

For a simple made-up example, assume one defendant, $100,000 in proved damages, and 20% fault assigned to you. A 20% reduction leaves $80,000 before other issues. This is math to explain the rule, not an estimate of any real case.


The percentage must rest on facts. Read [how to prove what caused the harm](https://californiapersonalinjurylaws.com/guides/prove-fault/).


Sources: [Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804](https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/3d/13/804.html); [CACI No. 405 — Comparative fault (2026 edition)](https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/judicial_council_of_california_civil_jury_instructions_2026.pdf)

## Fault, damages, and payment are different

First ask what each person did. Then ask what harm the acts caused. The amount that can be collected can raise more questions about insurance, other defendants, and damage limits.

Li changed the old all-or-nothing rule for negligence claims. It does not supply a fixed percentage for a rear-end crash, a bike crash, or any other event.


A case with several defendants has more allocation rules. See [claims with more than one at-fault person](https://californiapersonalinjurylaws.com/guides/more-than-one-person/).

For losses and payment sources, read [what affects claim value](https://californiapersonalinjurylaws.com/guides/case-value/).


Sources: [Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804](https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/3d/13/804.html); [Civil Code § 1431.2 — Noneconomic damages and fault](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=1431.2.); [Civil Code § 3333 — Compensation for harm](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=3333.)

## What can change the answer

A percentage is not set by what an adjuster says. The evidence matters, and some claims have special rules.

## A useful next step

Keep evidence that shows what each person did. Avoid guessing about your share of blame.

## Who decides the fault percentage?

The parties may dispute it during a claim. If the case is tried, the fact finder decides based on the proof and instructions. An adjuster’s first view is not the same as a final court decision.

## Does a traffic ticket settle the percentage?

A ticket may raise a legal issue, but it does not answer every question about harm or each person’s conduct. The record and the rules for using it still matter.

## Court decisions behind this answer

### Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975)

13 Cal.3d 804, pp. 827–829. A person can share fault and still have a negligence claim. Their share of blame can reduce the recovery.

Limit: This does not set anyone’s fault percentage. Other limits and defenses can still matter.

Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/3d/13/804.html

## Sources

- [CACI No. 405 — Comparative fault (2026 edition)](https://courts.ca.gov/system/files/file/judicial_council_of_california_civil_jury_instructions_2026.pdf)
- [Civil Code § 1431.2 — Noneconomic damages and fault](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=1431.2.)
- [Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804](https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/3d/13/804.html)
- [California Courts — Civil lawsuits](https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/civil-lawsuit)
- [Evidence Code § 669 — Presumption based on violation of law](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=EVID&sectionNum=669.)
- [Civil Code § 3333 — Compensation for harm](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=3333.)

General information, not legal advice.