Failure To Wear A Seatbelt Could Bar Or Limit Your Recovery In A Personal Injury Action

In the State of California, all occupants in a motorinjury action. If you are involved in an accident through
vehicle are required to wear a seatbelt anytime theno fault of your own and injured, at some point, the
vehicle is in motion. Billboards up and down ourquestion of whether you were belted will undoubtedly
freeways proclaim "Click It Or Ticket".come up.
The fact is, seatbelts save lives! This is no joke andThis is especially so if the injuries you suffered are
California legislators in the last few years have passedones that could arguably have been prevented had
legislation allowing peace officers not only to citeyou been wearing your seatbelt. Defense attorneys
drivers who fail to wear their seatbelts, but to useare sufficiently savvy to know that while their client
one's failure to wear a seat belt as a basis for amay have been the legal cause of the accident
traffic stop in the absence of your committing anycomplained of, they may not have been the legal
other offense. Notwithstanding the provisions of thecause of the injuries claimed by the plaintiff. If the
Vehicle Code that require use of a seatbelt wheninjured party would not have been injured had he or
operating or riding in a vehicle, your failure to buckle-upshe been wearing a seatbelt, the fact that the accident
could seriously impact, if not limit your right to recoverywas the fault of the defendant is of little to no
in a personal injury action if involved in an accident. Asconsequence. The injuries suffered were a direct
a matter of law, one who is negligent in the operationresult of the injured party's failure to wear his or her
of their vehicle is liable for all damage caused thereby.seatbelt. That being the case, the injured party is
It is well known that everyone operating a vehicle onprecluded from recovering anything for these injuries.
our roadways has an obligation to exercise due careThis concept is not new however, with a new set of
so as to avoid causing an unreasonable risk of harmjury instructions recently adopted which more clearly
to others. The breach of this duty constitutesspell out the law in this regard, jurors now have little
negligence.difficulty grasping this concept and have, of late, been
Little known is the fact that everyone operating amore apt to deny recovery to a plaintiff where it is
vehicle on our roadways or traveling as a passengershown that their injuries resulted from their own
in a vehicle on our roadways has a duty to avoidnegligence in failing to buckle-up. At EISENBERG LAW
creating an unreasonable risk of harm to themselves.GROUP, we encourage everyone to buckle up and
The breach of this duty constitutes comparative faultdrive safely.
and could serve as a bar to recovery in a personal