California's Controversial Prop 213 Became Law In 1996

On November 6, 1996, California voters passed Proposition 213, also known as the Personal Responsibility Act. The law was designed to limit the recovery of damages by uninsured motorists, drunk drivers, and those injured during the commission of a felony. Proposition 213 has had a significant impact on the rights of California drivers involved in automobile accidents, particularly regarding their ability to recover non-economic damages such as pain and suffering. The law has generated billions of dollars in profits for insurance companies while reducing premiums for insured drivers.

Uninsured motorists

Proposition 213, officially known as The Personal Responsibility Act of 1996, was passed on November 6, 1996, by the voters of California. It limits the right of uninsured motorists, drunk drivers, and felons to sue and recover damages from law-abiding citizens. The law came into effect on the same day it was passed and applied to all claims that had not proceeded to trial as of January 1, 1997.

Proposition 213 restricts uninsured drivers from recovering general damages or compensation for pain and suffering following a car accident. It does not, however, limit their ability to recover medical costs, lost wages, or compensation for future medical charges if the accident was caused by a negligent driver.

If a driver is uninsured, they are considered to have broken the law and are not entitled to the same rights as law-abiding citizens. Proposition 213 was designed to prevent uninsured motorists from recovering money for pain and suffering following an accident. This is because uninsured motorists are seen as irresponsible and their actions as unlawful.

There are, however, some exceptions to Proposition 213 when it comes to uninsured motorists:

• Passengers: Passengers of an uninsured vehicle are not subject to Proposition 213 and can recover both economic and non-economic damages.
• Employer-owned vehicles: If a company vehicle is uninsured, the employee driving it is not responsible for insurance and is exempt from Proposition 213.
• Accidents on private property: Accidents occurring on private property are not subject to Proposition 213.
• Accidents resulting in wrongful death claims: If an accident involves a wrongful death claim, the family of the deceased can recover general damages even if the driver is uninsured.
• Accidents caused by drunk driving: If an uninsured driver is hit by a drunk driver, they are still entitled to general damages.
• The owner of the vehicle did not have insurance, but the driver did: If the driver has insurance on another vehicle, they are considered insured and entitled to full compensation.

Drunk drivers

On November 6, 1996, Californian voters passed Proposition 213, also known as the Personal Responsibility Act. The law took effect on the same day and applied to all claims that had not proceeded to trial as of January 1, 1997.

Proposition 213 was designed to prevent uninsured motorists, drunk drivers, and felons from receiving significant insurance payouts when involved in an accident. The law prohibits drunk drivers from suing for pain and suffering when they are injured while driving, while still protecting their right to be compensated for medical and out-of-pocket expenses.

Under Proposition 213, drunk drivers involved in an accident in California can recover economic damages, such as compensation for medical bills, lost income, and property damage. However, they cannot pursue or receive non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement, or loss of consortium.

There are several exceptions to Proposition 213, including:

• Drivers of company-owned vehicles whose employers fail to obtain auto insurance.
• If the uninsured driver is an innocent spouse who did not know their spouse failed to purchase insurance coverage.
• Motor vehicle accidents on private property.
• Drivers who carry insurance coverage and borrow an uninsured car.
• Passengers of uninsured vehicles as long as they are not the vehicle owner.

Convicted felons

Proposition 213, also known as the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996, was passed in California on November 5, 1996. The law restricts convicted felons from suing to recover losses suffered while committing a crime or fleeing the scene if these losses resulted from another person's negligence.

Impact on Convicted Felons

Proposition 213 has had a significant impact on the rights of convicted felons in California. Here are some key ways in which the law affects convicted felons:

• Limitation on Recovery of Losses: The law prohibits convicted felons from suing to recover any non-economic losses, such as pain and suffering, disfigurement, emotional distress, and physical impairment, if these losses occurred while committing a felony or fleeing the scene. This restriction aims to prevent felons from being rewarded for their criminal actions and to reduce the financial burden on law-abiding citizens and insurance companies.
• Exceptions to the Rule: While Proposition 213 limits the recovery of non-economic losses, convicted felons are still able to sue for economic damages, such as medical expenses, lost wages, and property damage resulting from their injuries. Additionally, if the injuries were caused by excessive force during an arrest or police pursuit, felons may be able to recover non-economic damages in certain circumstances.
• Reduction in Lawsuits: The implementation of Proposition 213 has resulted in a decrease in the number of lawsuits filed by convicted felons. This has led to a reduction in court-related costs for state and local governments, as they handle fewer cases involving convicted felons seeking compensation for injuries sustained during crimes.
• Insurance Premiums: One of the primary goals of Proposition 213 was to lower insurance premiums for law-abiding citizens in California. By reducing the liability of insurance companies for certain types of crashes, the initiative has helped achieve this goal. Insurance Commissioner Chuck Quackenbush attributed a $71 million reduction in rates filed by Mercury Insurance Co. to the proposition, with a 20% decrease in rates for uninsured motorist coverage and a 15% decrease for bodily injury coverage.
• Constitutional Challenges: Proposition 213 has faced numerous constitutional challenges over the years, but it has been upheld by the courts. The California Second District Court of Appeals upheld the part of the proposition limiting the recovery of non-economic losses by fleeing felons, drunk drivers, and uninsured motorists. However, there are ongoing efforts to enforce legal actions against drivers affected by the proposition.
• Public Opinion and Support: Proposition 213 received support from various organisations, including Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), the California Police Chiefs Association, and the Doris Tate Crime Victims Bureau. These groups argued that the initiative was necessary to hold individuals accountable for their actions and prevent unreasonable lawsuits against law-abiding citizens. However, the proposition also faced opposition from groups such as the Proposition 103 Enforcement Project, led by consumer watchdog Harvey Rosenfield, and the California Trial Lawyers Association.

Non-economic damages

Proposition 213, also known as the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996, was passed by California voters on November 6, 1996, and took effect immediately. The law affects individuals involved in motor vehicle accidents, particularly those without insurance or driving under the influence. It significantly impacts the rights of uninsured drivers by limiting their ability to recover certain types of damages.

One of the key provisions of Proposition 213 is the restriction on claiming non-economic damages in the event of an accident. Non-economic damages refer to compensation for pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, physical impairment, disfigurement, and other intangible losses. These types of damages do not have a precise, quantifiable dollar amount tied to them, unlike economic damages such as medical bills or lost earnings.

Under Proposition 213, uninsured drivers are barred from recovering non-economic damages. This means that even if they were not at fault for the accident, they cannot seek compensation for pain and suffering, emotional distress, or other non-monetary losses. This restriction can lead to financial hardship for those affected and emphasizes the importance of maintaining adequate insurance coverage.

However, it is important to note that Proposition 213 does not prevent uninsured drivers from recovering economic damages. Economic damages refer to quantifiable losses such as medical expenses, lost wages, and property damage. Uninsured drivers can still seek compensation for these types of damages, although their overall compensation may be significantly reduced due to the inability to recover non-economic damages.

Proposition 213 also includes certain exceptions to the restriction on non-economic damages. These exceptions include:

• Accidents caused by another party's negligence, such as drunk driving or reckless behaviour.
• Passengers in an uninsured vehicle who do not own the vehicle and were unaware of the driver's lack of insurance.
• Accidents occurring on private property.
• Drivers who have insurance but were driving a borrowed, uninsured vehicle at the time of the accident.

In conclusion, Proposition 213 has a significant impact on uninsured drivers involved in motor vehicle accidents in California. While it restricts their ability to recover non-economic damages, it is important to understand the exceptions and consult with an experienced attorney to navigate the complexities of the law and maximize potential recovery.

Exceptions to Prop 213

Proposition 213, also known as the Personal Responsibility Act, was passed in California in 1996. It prevents drivers injured in car accidents from obtaining damages for pain and suffering if they lack insurance or if the car they were driving was uninsured.

Passengers of Uninsured Vehicles:

If you were a passenger in an uninsured vehicle, Proposition 213 does not apply to you as long as you did not own the uninsured vehicle. You are entitled to recover damages for both economic and non-economic losses.

Driving a Company Car:

If you were driving a company car that was uninsured due to your employer's failure to insure the vehicle, Proposition 213 does not apply to you.

Accidents Resulting in Wrongful Death Claims:

If the accident resulted in a wrongful death claim, Proposition 213 does not apply. The family of the deceased can recover general damages even if the driver was uninsured.

Accidents Caused by Drunk Driving:

If you were injured in an accident caused by a drunk driver while you were uninsured, Proposition 213 does not apply. You are still entitled to general damages in this case.

Accidents on Private Property:

Proposition 213 does not apply to accidents that occur on private property.

Insurance on a Different Vehicle:

If the driver of the vehicle had insurance on a different car, but the vehicle involved in the accident was uninsured and owned by someone else, Proposition 213 does not apply.

Punitive Damages:

Proposition 213 does not prevent the recovery of punitive damages. If the defendant is found guilty of a serious crime or violation, they may be required to pay punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages.

Frequently asked questions