Autonomous driving technology holds promise for enhancing road safety by addressing human error, a leading cause of accidents. Like any technology, autonomous vehicles are not entirely immune to accidents. Determining responsibility in autonomous vehicle accidents can be intricate, requiring a thorough examination of the technology involved, scrutiny of data logs, analysis of the autonomous system's behavior, and assessment of any human influence during the incident. Seeking advice from a specialized personal injury attorney familiar with autonomous vehicle accidents is crucial. Their expertise can help guide you throughout the legal proceedings and aid in gathering the essential evidence needed to establish fault.

Parties at Fault for the Driverless Car Accident

Determining fault in an accident involving a driverless car can be a complex process that relies on the specific circumstances of the incident. Liability could be attributed to various parties:

  • The autonomous vehicle driver could be held responsible for the crash since they are expected to monitor the vehicle and take immediate control of the car when necessary.
  • The manufacturer can be held responsible if the accident results from defects in the driverless car's design, manufacturing, software, or autonomous technology. The liability extends to the software developers and system operators.
    1. The software developer or the company responsible for developing the autonomous system could bear fault if the accident was caused by flaws or bugs in the software.
    2. The system operator, for example, the company managing the autonomous car fleet, could be deemed liable if the accident stemmed from inadequate training, negligence, or improper maintenance of the driverless vehicle.
  • Other drivers, pedestrians, or third parties could share fault if their actions contributed to the accident, regardless of the autonomy of the involved vehicle. For instance, a human driver engaging in reckless driving that leads to a collision with a driverless car could be held accountable.

In accidents involving autonomous vehicles, negligence potentially plays a role, similar to accidents involving human-driven cars. Negligence involves failing to exercise reasonable care or adhere to appropriate standards, leading to harm or damage to others.

When asserting negligence as a plaintiff in car accidents, it becomes necessary to furnish evidentiary support that effectively establishes the existence of a duty of care. This legal principle pertains to the obligation imposed on one party by another, mandating the exercise of reasonable care and caution to avert harm that could be reasonably anticipated.

In autonomous vehicle accidents, the pivotal task involves demonstrating that the party held accountable was saddled with a distinct obligation to act in a manner that forestalled harm. The intricacies of this obligation could fluctuate depending on the distinctive circumstances at hand and the interplay between the parties involved.

Once the foundation of the duty of care is solidified, you must substantiate that the defendant failed to adhere to the requisite standard of care. This necessitates a compelling demonstration that the defendant's deeds or omissions diverged from what a reasonably prudent individual or entity would have done in similar circumstances.

Furthermore, it is essential to show that the defendant's breach of duty directly caused the accident and resulting damages. This concept, known as proximate cause, means that the defendant's actions or omissions significantly brought about the harm you suffered.

  1. The Operator of the Partially Autonomous Car

Presently, most driverless vehicles implement a safety measure by having a human occupant in the driver's seat. These vehicles participate in pilot programs that necessitate the presence of a human test driver or operator who can promptly assume control of the car if an emergency arises.

In California, the term "operator" encompasses both the individual physically seated in the driver's seat and the person responsible for activating the autonomous technology when there is no person present in that seat. As Vehicle Code 38750 stipulates, autonomous vehicles must include a safety alert system that notifies the operator of any identified malfunctions in the autonomous technology. Additionally, the operator must possess the capability to assume complete control of the autonomous vehicle, encompassing the utilization of the brake, accelerator, and steering wheel.

If a test driver fails to assume control during an emergency, they will be held accountable for causing the accident. Similarly, if the operator takes control of the vehicle and their actions contribute to the occurrence of the accident, the test driver could also be considered liable. When the test driver disengages the self-driving mode or overrides the autonomous system, they essentially operate the vehicle like any other driver.

Nevertheless, California began accepting applications for fully driverless vehicles. These applications permit the testing of autonomous cars without requiring human test drivers or conventional driving controls like steering wheels, mirrors, or gas and brake pedals.

Specific vehicles, including Tesla models, are equipped with an autopilot system. Although drivers could perceive this system as a self-driving mode, they are still obliged to possess the ability to assume control of the vehicle in the event of an accident.

  1. The Driver of the Autonomous Vehicle

The jury could assign a portion of the fault to the autonomous car’s driver. This means the driver can be held accountable for their actions. Similar to any accident involving human-driven vehicles, if the driver of a non-driverless car fails to exercise reasonable care or disregards traffic laws, resulting in an accident, they can be deemed at fault.

Drivers of autonomous vehicles owe a duty of care to various parties involved in the traffic environment. These parties include:

  • Pedestrians.
  • Other drivers.
  • Cyclists and motorcyclists.
  • Passengers.
  • Property owners.

Signs that a driver of an autonomous vehicle could have been negligent include:

  • Failure to monitor the vehicle — If the driver fails to actively monitor the autonomous vehicle's operations and surroundings as required, it could indicate negligence. This includes not paying attention to the road or being distracted while the car is in autonomous mode.
  • Inability to assume control when required — If the driver is unable or fails to take control of the vehicle when necessary, for example, during an emergency or when prompted by the autonomous system, it suggests negligence. The driver should be prepared to intervene and override the autonomous mode if required.
  • Disregarding traffic laws and regulations — Negligence could be evident if the driver of an autonomous vehicle ignores traffic laws, for instance, speeding, running red lights, or making illegal maneuvers. The driver should adhere to all applicable traffic rules and regulations.
  • Lack of proper maintenance and inspections — If the driver neglects regular maintenance and inspections of the autonomous vehicle, leading to malfunctions or failures, it can indicate negligence. The driver is responsible for ensuring the car is safe and operational.
  • Failure to update software and systems — Negligence could be present if the driver fails to update the autonomous vehicle's software and systems as the manufacturer recommends. Updated software often contains improvements, bug fixes, and safety enhancements.
  • Ignoring safety alerts and warnings — If the driver disregards or fails to respond appropriately to safety alerts or warnings provided by the autonomous vehicle's system, it is deemed negligence. These alerts are designed to notify the driver of potential hazards or malfunctions.

  1. The Autonomous Vehicle’s Manufacturer

Manufacturers are responsible for ensuring that their autonomous vehicles meet rigorous safety standards while undergoing meticulous design, production, and testing procedures. In the unfortunate event of an accident, if the courts determine that a defect in the vehicle's design, manufacturing, or software played a role, the manufacturer can be held legally accountable for any resulting damages under the principles of product liability.

Product liability places an obligation on manufacturers and sellers to address any defects or hazards in their products that cause harm to consumers. It ensures that manufacturers are held accountable for the safety and quality of the goods they produce and distribute.

Within the context of a civil case against an autonomous vehicle manufacturer, product liability assumes significant importance. When an accident or injury occurs due to a defect in the vehicle's design, manufacturing, or warning labels, the injured party can pursue a product liability lawsuit against the manufacturer.

To establish product liability, the plaintiff must prove several essential elements. They include the following:

  • The plaintiff must demonstrate the presence of a defect in the autonomous vehicle, rendering it unreasonably dangerous when used as intended. This defect should significantly contribute to the accident or injury suffered.
  • The plaintiff is tasked with providing evidence that the accident or injury transpired during the reasonably foreseeable use of the vehicle, emphasizing the correlation between the defect and the harm caused.
  • If the accident or injury can be attributed to insufficient warnings or instructions concerning the risks of the autonomous vehicle, the plaintiff must illustrate that the manufacturer failed to deliver appropriate and adequate warnings or instructions.

In a driverless car accident lawsuit against an autonomous vehicle manufacturer, product liability comes into effect when inherent flaws exist in the vehicle's design, errors arise during the manufacturing process, or the manufacturer neglects to furnish sufficient warnings regarding the vehicle's limitations or potential risks.

Compensation Recoverable in a Driverless Car Accident Lawsuit

In a driverless car accident lawsuit, various damages can be sought, including economic, non-economic, and punitive damages.

  1. Economic Damages

Economic damages seek to compensate the plaintiff for actual financial losses due to the accident. Examples include:

  • Medical expenses — These are the costs of medical treatment, hospitalization, surgeries, medications, rehabilitation, and any future medical expenses tied to accident-related injuries.
  • Lost income — The plaintiff is entitled to compensation for wages or income that they would have earned during the duration of missed work or diminished earning capacity caused by the accident.
  • Property damage — Provides compensation for repairing or replacing the plaintiff's damaged vehicle or other personal property affected by the accident.
  • Rehabilitation and assistive devices — Includes the costs associated with long-term rehabilitation or the acquisition of assistive devices like wheelchairs or prosthetics necessitated by the accident.

  1. Non-Economic Damages

Non-economic damages aim to compensate for non-financial, more subjective losses. It is also worth noting that economic and non-economic damages are compensatory damages. They include:

  • Pain and suffering — This compensation caters to the physical pain, emotional distress, and mental anguish experienced due to the accident and resulting injuries.
  • Loss of enjoyment of life — Plaintiffs can seek compensation if the accident significantly diminishes the plaintiff's ability to engage in activities or enjoy life as before.
  • Emotional distress — Addresses emotional trauma, anxiety, depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) resulting from the accident and compensating for the associated emotional distress.

  1. Punitive Damages

Punitive damages are awarded in cases where the defendant's conduct is considered reckless, wanton, or malicious. Their purpose is to punish the defendant and deter similar behavior in the future. However, the availability and limits of punitive damages vary and require a higher burden of proof.

Comparative Negligence in California

In autonomous car accident lawsuits in California, the legal principle of pure comparative negligence plays a significant role, much like in other personal injury cases. Comparative negligence is a fundamental concept that determines the extent of fault or responsibility attributed to each party involved in an accident.

Under the doctrine of pure comparative negligence, the court allocates a specific percentage of fault to all parties, including the plaintiff and the defendant. This means that even if the plaintiff bears some responsibility for the accident, they still have the right to seek compensation for their damages. However, the amount awarded is proportionately reduced based on their assigned percentage of fault.

For example: If the court determines that the plaintiff holds 30% of the blame. In comparison, the defendant's autonomous vehicle bears 70% of the blame, and the plaintiff's compensation will be adjusted accordingly, deducting their 30% share of the fault. For instance, if the total damages awarded amount to $100,000, the plaintiff would ultimately receive $70,000 after accounting for their 30% comparative negligence.

California adheres to the "pure" form of comparative negligence, which allows plaintiffs to recover damages even if they are deemed more at fault than the defendant. However, their awarded amount will still be diminished in proportion to their assigned percentage of fault.

In autonomous car accident lawsuits, the application of pure comparative negligence facilitates a fair evaluation of fault, ensuring that each party's level of responsibility is duly considered.

Wrongful Death Lawsuits

Wrongful death lawsuits involving autonomous cars present a complex and dynamic field of law. If a person loses their life in an autonomous vehicle accident, his/her family or estate retains the right to initiate a wrongful death claim against the responsible parties. The law stipulates that eligible family members encompass the victim's:

  • Spouse.
  • Children.
  • Parents.
  • Grandchildren (if the children are deceased).
  • Domestic partners, and
  • Individuals entitled to the deceased's property per California's succession laws.

Despite the involvement of autonomous technology, the legal principles governing negligence and liability remain applicable in wrongful death suits. The primary hurdle lies in determining the parties responsible for the accident and the subsequent loss of life.

The damages pursued in wrongful death lawsuits related to autonomous cars could entail seeking compensation for funeral and burial expenses, the deprivation of financial support, the loss of companionship, and other associated losses. These damages address the various hardships the surviving family members endured after the tragic event.

Why an Attorney is Important in a Driverless Car Accident Lawsuit

An attorney's assistance can be invaluable when making your case in an autonomous car lawsuit. There are several ways they are valuable to your case, including:

  • Legal expertise — An attorney specialized in autonomous car lawsuits possesses in-depth knowledge of the relevant laws, regulations, and precedents. They can guide you on how these laws apply to your case and help you navigate the complex legal landscape.
  • Case assessment — A personal injury attorney will evaluate the details of your case, including the evidence, circumstances, and applicable laws, to assess the strength of your claim. They can provide an objective perspective on the likelihood of success and help you understand the potential outcomes and risks.
  • Investigation and evidence gathering — Attorneys have the resources and expertise to conduct a thorough investigation and gather evidence to support your case. They can obtain accident reports, gather witness statements, consult with experts, and collect relevant documentation or data to build a solid evidentiary foundation.
  • Building a compelling argument — Based on the evidence gathered, an attorney will develop a persuasive legal argument to support your position. They will formulate a strategy to present your case effectively, highlighting the key points and legal theories that strengthen your claim.
  • Negotiation and settlement — Attorneys are skilled negotiators who can engage with the opposing party or their insurance representatives to seek a fair settlement on your behalf. They will advocate for your rights and use their legal knowledge and negotiation skills to achieve the best possible outcome.
  • Court representation — If your case proceeds to litigation, an attorney will represent you. They will present your case, examine, cross-examine opposing witnesses, and make legal arguments to support your position. They will ensure that your rights are protected throughout the legal proceedings.
  • Legal strategy and advice — An attorney will develop a comprehensive legal approach tailored to your circumstances. They will guide important decisions, like whether to settle or proceed to trial, based on their experience and understanding of the legal system.
  • Managing paperwork and deadlines — Lawsuits involve significant amounts of paperwork, filings, and adherence to strict deadlines. An attorney will handle the administrative aspects of your case, ensuring that all necessary documents are prepared, filed correctly, and submitted within the required timeframes.

Find a Los Angeles Personal Injury Attorney Near Me

If you or a loved one is a victim of a driverless car accident and are seeking compensation, contact The LA Personal Injury Law Firm. Our team is ready to take on your case and seek fair compensation for your injuries and losses. Contact us at 310-935-0089 for more information.