Do California Vehicle Codes Apply to Car Accidents?

Yes, but it’s important to clarify what is meant when we say that California Vehicle Codes (such as CVC 22350, which governs unsafe speeds, or CVC 21703, which governs how closely motor vehicle operators are allowed to follow behind others) apply to the litigation of a car accident dispute.

Let’s take a closer look at the concept of “negligence per se,” which is foundational when evaluating the violation of a traffic law and its application to a personal injury case, such as a car accident dispute.

In California, as in other states, a standard negligence-based car accident claim requires the plaintiff to show that the defendant violated the standard of care and, in doing so, they caused the plaintiff to suffer injuries. Having to prove negligence can be quite difficult, as the defendant can avoid liability by establishing a low bar for the standard of care, or by introducing third-party testimony supporting the contention that their conduct did not constitute negligence.

Negligence per se gives the plaintiff a powerful tool for automatically establishing negligence in their lawsuit. When the defendant violates a law, and thereby causes the plaintiff to suffer injuries, they can be found automatically negligent (without any further negligence analysis) if the circumstances are right.

In California, a plaintiff in a car accident or any other type of accident may secure damages in a negligence per se lawsuit by showing that:

1. The defendant violated a statute, ordinance, or regulation of a public entity (such as a traffic law);
2. The defendant caused the plaintiff to suffer injuries as a result, and those injuries were of a type that the statute, ordinance, or regulation was intended to prevent; and
3. The plaintiff belonged to a class of persons who the statute, ordinance, or regulation was intended to protect.

We’ll go through a quick example to clarify how negligence per se applies.

Suppose that you are injured in a car accident. After further investigation, you discover that the accident was caused by the defendant’s speeding — the defendant sped along a rain-slicked road, causing them to lose traction and slam into your vehicle. The defendant’s conduct violated CVC 22350, which requires that drivers modulate their speed in accordance with road and weather conditions. Given the circumstances, it’s likely that you would be able to show that the defendant is liable for negligence per se. You would not have to prove that the defendant’s conduct fell below a standard of care.