California Proposition 213

The California Proposition 213, also known as the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996, was a ballot measure that passed with a 76% majority vote in November of 1996. This proposition amended the California Civil Code, section 3333.4, and limited the ability of uninsured motorists to recover non-economic damages in case of car accidents. This proposition has a significant impact on compensation for those involved in car accidents while driving without insurance even if the accident occurred at no fault of their own.

On November 5, 1996, Californians voted on Proposition 213, which aimed to limit the amount of compensation that an uninsured motorist could recover in a civil lawsuit after being involved in a car accident. The proposition was backed by insurance companies and proponents of tort reform, who argued that uninsured motorists should not be allowed to collect non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering or emotional distress, which could result in higher car insurance premiums for everyone.

Background

Proposition 213 was a response to the rising cost of car insurance, particularly in California, which had one of the highest rates in the nation. It was sponsored and funded by the insurance industry, which spent millions of dollars on a campaign to promote the initiative. The proposition also had the support of Governor Pete Wilson, who signed it into law on November 26, 1996.

The proposition amended the California Civil Code, section 3333.4, and limited the ability of uninsured motorists to recover non-economic damages in case of a car accident. It stated that any driver who did not have liability insurance at the time of the accident would not be entitled to collect non-economic damages from the other driver, even if the other driver was found to be at fault. The law also extended to passengers who were uninsured at the time of the accident.

Impact

The passage of Proposition 213 had a significant impact on those involved in car accidents, particularly uninsured motorists. It meant that these drivers would be unable to collect non-economic damages from the other driver, even if they had suffered serious injuries or emotional distress. Instead, they would only be able to recover economic damages, such as medical expenses and lost wages.

The proposition also had a significant impact on the insurance industry in California. Insurance companies could use the law to deny claims for non-economic damages by uninsured motorists, reducing their exposure to payouts. It also resulted in lower premiums for insured drivers, who would no longer have to pay higher rates to cover the costs of uninsured drivers who sued for non-economic damages.

Controversy and Challenges

Proposition 213 faced numerous legal challenges, particularly from plaintiffs’ attorneys and consumer advocates who argued that it violated the California Constitution’s equal protection clause. They argued that the proposition unfairly discriminated against uninsured drivers, denying them the same legal rights as insured drivers. However, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 213 in a 6-1 ruling in 1999, stating that it was a valid exercise of the state’s police powers.

In conclusion, Proposition 213 remains a controversial ballot measure that has had a lasting impact on car insurance and personal injury claims in California. Despite its legal challenges, it remains on the books and limits the ability of uninsured motorists to recover non-economic damages in case of a car accident. It is an important reminder of the ongoing debate between tort reform advocates and those who believe in protecting consumers’ rights.

Eduard Braun, ESQ
Law Office Of Eduard Braun, P.C.
877-533-4529
www.eBraunLaw.com