1LAW Logo

Injury Claims Against A City Bus Agency In California

Start a free AI-assisted chat and connect with an experienced California attorney, with no obligation.

JV

Reviewed & verified by A. Jason Velez, Esq.*

Founding Attorney, 1LAW · Last reviewed July 24, 2022

Legal Inquiry

Consumer Legal Issue

I fell down on a city bus and sustained a sprained third finger and had to have my ring sawed off by the fire dept. And I have lingering back aches, and I have reduced range of motion in my finger 2/3rds. The other accident I had a sprained shoulder and frozen shoulder occurred.

Attorney Answer

Before anything else, understand the calendar. A claim against a city or a public transit agency is not on the ordinary two-year track — it has to be presented to the agency within six months, and that is the deadline people miss. Everything else in your situation is workable. That one is not.

Cal. Gov't Code § 911.2(a) requires a claim for death or for injury to a person or to personal property against a public entity to be presented not later than six months after the cause of action accrues. A city bus system is a public entity, so this applies. "Presented" means a written claim delivered to the entity, normally on the claim form it publishes; it comes before, and is separate from, any lawsuit. Cal. Gov't Code § 945.4 also requires that presentation to happen before a suit can be brought at all, and once the entity acts on the claim a further, separate and short deadline under Cal. Gov't Code § 945.6(a) starts running for going to court. Those two follow-on rules have their own statutes, and they are exactly the kind of thing to have a local attorney confirm rather than read off a website.

On the merits, the standard is ordinary negligence. Cal. Civ. Code § 1714(a) provides that everyone is responsible for an injury occasioned to another by his or her want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his or her property or person. That reaches how a bus is driven and how a passenger's safety is handled while it is moving.

Expect the agency to argue that you should have been holding on. That argument does not end a claim in California. Applying § 1714(a), the Supreme Court in Daly v. General Motors Corp., 20 Cal. 3d 725 (1978), described a pure comparative system in which a plaintiff's recovery is reduced only to the extent his own lack of reasonable care contributed to his injury. Being found partly at fault reduces a recovery here; it does not wipe it out.

Your lingering symptoms are part of the claim, not an afterthought. Cal. Civ. Code § 3333 sets the measure: "For the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, the measure of damages, except where otherwise expressly provided by this Code, is the amount which will compensate for all the detriment proximately caused thereby, whether it could have been anticipated or not." Reduced motion in a finger and continuing back pain are detriment, and they need to be documented by a doctor, not just described.

Finally, you mention a second accident. Treat it as a separate matter with its own deadline and its own responsible party. Do not assume one claim carries the other.

What you can do

1. Ask the transit agency for its claim form today and present a written claim. Cal. Gov't Code § 911.2(a) gives six months from accrual, and the form is free.

2. Present it to the transit agency and, if they are separate bodies, to the city as well. Keep proof of delivery and a copy of everything you send.

3. Write to the agency asking it to preserve the onboard and platform video, the driver's report, and the incident report for that route, run and date. Video is routinely overwritten in weeks.

4. See a doctor about the finger and the back specifically, and say the fall on the bus is the cause. Keep every record, bill and receipt, including the fire department's involvement.

5. Ask a local attorney which entity actually operates the bus, and about the deadline that follows the agency's response to your claim.

Most lawyers offer a brief initial call at no cost, and a few minutes on your specific facts is worth more than any general guidance, including this page.

⏱ Time limits apply. Cal. Gov't Code § 911.2(a) is the controlling one: six months from accrual to present the claim to the public entity — far shorter than the two years Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 335.1 allows for an ordinary injury claim. When the six months started, whether it has run, and what deadline follows the agency's answer all depend on your facts. Have a local attorney check the dates now.

Cases Cited

Published decisions relevant to this issue, provided as legal background rather than advice about any particular case.

  • Daly v. General Motors Corp., 20 Cal. 3d 725 (1978) — Cal. Supreme Court
    Pure comparative negligence — a plaintiff's recovery is reduced in proportion to his own want of care rather than barred. Cited because § 1714(a)'s text reads as an all-or-nothing carve-out and does not state the proportional rule.

*Attorney review is supported by AI-assisted drafting and legal research algorithms. Use of this Chat does not create an attorney-client relationship.

By using this service you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Courts & Legal Aid in California

Frequently Asked Questions

How long do you have to file an injury claim against a city bus or transit agency in California?

Far less time than for an ordinary injury claim. Cal. Gov't Code § 911.2(a) requires a claim for death or for injury to person or personal property against a public entity to be presented not later than six months after the cause of action accrues, and a public transit operator is a public entity. That presentation is a written claim delivered to the agency, and Cal. Gov't Code § 945.4 requires it before any lawsuit. Once the agency responds, a separate and short deadline under Cal. Gov't Code § 945.6(a) governs going to court. By contrast, Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 335.1 gives two years for an injury claim against a private defendant. The six-month rule is the one that ends cases.

Does a bus passenger lose their claim if they were not holding on?

No. California apportions fault instead of using it as a bar. Cal. Civ. Code § 1714(a) makes a person responsible for injury occasioned by a want of ordinary care, and in applying it the California Supreme Court in Daly v. General Motors Corp., 20 Cal. 3d 725 (1978), described a pure comparative system in which a plaintiff's recovery is reduced only to the extent that his own lack of reasonable care contributed to his injury. A passenger who is found partly responsible recovers a reduced amount rather than nothing. How fault is divided on any particular set of facts is a jury question.

Do lingering symptoms count in a California injury claim, or only the initial injury?

They count. Cal. Civ. Code § 3333 provides that for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, the measure of damages is the amount which will compensate for all the detriment proximately caused, whether it could have been anticipated or not. Continuing pain, stiffness and reduced range of motion are detriment. What matters practically is proof: symptoms that appear only in a claim letter carry little weight, while symptoms recorded by a treating doctor, with the cause noted, carry a great deal. Gaps in treatment are the most common reason a genuine continuing injury is undervalued.

Privacy Policy Terms of Use Your Privacy Choices