Can You Sue Caltrans for a Car Accident Caused by a Road Defect in California?
Yes. California Government Code section 835 allows an injured person to sue Caltrans, a city, or a county for a crash caused by a dangerous condition of public property. The catch is the deadline: you have only six months from the date of the crash to file a government claim, not the two years that apply to an ordinary injury case.
- Six months to present a written government claim under Government Code section 911.2.
- The claim goes to the specific entity that owned and controlled the road.
- Missing the deadline usually bars the lawsuit before it is ever filed.
A limited late-claim procedure exists, but it is discretionary and far from a safety net.
When a crash happens because of the road itself rather than another driver, the case follows a completely different set of rules. Claims involving a dangerous condition of public property in California are governed by the Government Claims Act, and that statute imposes a filing deadline so short that most of these cases are lost before anyone realizes a claim exists.
In Shasta County, these cases come out of the places you would expect: rural stretches of Highway 299 and Highway 44, unlit intersections, shoulder drop-offs, and obscured warning signs on curves that give a driver no chance to slow down.
Key Takeaways about County Liability for a Road Hazard in California
- Government Code section 835 makes public entities liable for injuries caused by a dangerous condition of their property when they created the condition or knew about it and had time to fix it.
- A written government claim must be presented within six months of the injury under Government Code section 911.2.
- After a claim is rejected, Government Code section 945.6 generally allows six months to file suit.
- The design immunity defense under Government Code section 830.6 protects approved road designs, but it can be lost when conditions change.
- Notice evidence, including maintenance records and prior complaints, is usually what decides these cases.
What Counts as a Dangerous Condition of Public Property in California?
A dangerous condition is a condition of public property that creates a substantial risk of injury when the property is used with due care in a way that is reasonably foreseeable. Government Code section 830 supplies that definition, and the word doing the most work is “substantial.”
Minor, trivial, or insignificant defects do not qualify. A shallow crack in the pavement is not a dangerous condition. A shoulder drop-off of several inches on a rural highway where vehicles routinely drift right can be.
Road defect claims we see most often involve a recurring set of conditions.
- Deep potholes and broken pavement that cause a driver to lose control.
- Unpaved shoulder drop-offs that make it dangerous to recover after drifting off the travel lane.
- Missing, damaged, or vegetation-obscured warning and curve signs.
- Guardrails that are missing, end-treated improperly, or in disrepair.
- Intersections with obstructed sight lines caused by landscaping, embankments, or poorly placed structures.
- Drainage failures that put standing water or ice across a travel lane.
What matters is not simply that the condition existed. It is whether the condition created a real risk for a driver who was paying attention and driving reasonably.
The Four Things Government Code § 835 Requires You to Prove
Liability under Government Code section 835 is narrower than ordinary negligence, and the elements have to line up.
1. The property was in a dangerous condition at the time of the injury
This is the substantial-risk standard from Government Code section 830. Public entities frequently argue that the defect was trivial, which makes precise measurement and photographic documentation of the condition important early.
2. The dangerous condition caused the injury
The condition has to be a substantial factor in what happened. Accident reconstruction often carries this element, particularly in single-vehicle crashes where the entity will argue the driver simply made a mistake.
3. The kind of injury was a reasonably foreseeable consequence
The risk that materialized has to be the kind of risk the condition created. A missing curve warning sign foreseeably leads to a driver entering a curve too fast.
4. Either an employee created the condition, or the entity was on notice
This is where most cases are won or lost. Either a public employee negligently created the condition while acting within the scope of employment, or the entity had actual or constructive notice of it long enough before the crash to have done something about it.
Constructive notice means the condition existed long enough and was obvious enough that a reasonable inspection program should have caught it. A pothole that opened the night before rarely satisfies that test. A shoulder drop-off that residents complained about for two years is a different matter.
Who Owns the Road Where You Crashed?
The claim must be filed with the entity that owned and controlled that specific stretch of road, and getting it wrong can cost the case. State highways belong to Caltrans, county roads belong to the county, and city streets belong to the city.
The complication is that these boundaries change mid-roadway without any visible marker. A state route can run through city limits with maintenance responsibility split between two agencies, and an intersection can involve a county road meeting a state highway. In those situations, the right move is often to present claims to every entity that may have had control.
Nearby private property can also be part of the picture when vegetation or a structure blocks sight lines. Sorting out overlapping responsibility is the same analysis at the heart of road hazard liability generally.
How Long Do You Have to File a Government Claim?
Six months from the date of injury. Government Code section 911.2 requires a written claim for death or personal injury to be presented within six months after the cause of action accrues, and section 945.4 bars any lawsuit until that claim has been presented and rejected.
This is the single most consequential fact in this entire area of law. Someone who waits a year to call a lawyer, well inside the normal two-year window under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1, has usually already lost the claim.
A late-claim procedure exists. Under Government Code section 911.4, an application for leave to present a late claim can be submitted within one year of accrual, explaining why the claim was late. The entity can deny it, and the remaining path is a court petition under section 946.6 with no assurance of success.
After a claim is presented, the entity has 45 days to act on it. If it mails a written rejection, Government Code section 945.6 generally gives six months from that mailing to file suit. If no written rejection with the required statutory warning is ever served, the window is two years from accrual instead.
How the Government Claim Process Works, Step by Step
The mechanics are unforgiving but not complicated, and knowing the sequence removes a lot of the uncertainty.
- Step 1: Identify the right entity. Determine which agency owned and controlled the roadway at the crash location, including the post mile if it was a state highway.
- Step 2: Prepare the written claim. Government Code sections 910 and 910.2 set out what a claim must contain, including the date and location, a description of what happened, the employees involved if known, and the amount claimed.
- Step 3: File with the correct office. Injury claims against a city or county go directly to that entity’s clerk. Serious injury claims against Caltrans go to the state Government Claims Program administered by the Department of General Services, while small property damage claims are handled by Caltrans directly.
- Step 4: Track the 45-day response window. Calendar the date of presentation and the date of any rejection, because the lawsuit deadline runs from the rejection rather than from the crash.
- Step 5: File suit within the statutory window. Once the claim is rejected or deemed rejected, the case proceeds in Superior Court like any other injury lawsuit.
Anyone handling a Caltrans matter themselves can find the state’s own instructions on how to file a Caltrans claim useful as a starting point, though injury claims are worth having reviewed before anything is submitted.
The Design Immunity Defense and Why It Does Not End Every Case
Public entities defend these cases aggressively, and their strongest tool is design immunity. Government Code section 830.6 shields an entity from liability for a feature of public property built according to a plan that was approved in advance by someone with discretionary authority, where substantial evidence supports the reasonableness of that plan.
To establish it, the entity has to show three things: a causal connection between the approved plan and the crash, discretionary approval before construction, and substantial evidence that a reasonable public employee could have approved the design.
Design immunity has real limits. It covers the design that was actually approved, not conditions that developed afterward, and not features that departed from the plan as built. An entity can also lose design immunity when changed physical conditions make a once-reasonable design dangerous, and the entity had notice of that change.
A separate theory survives design immunity entirely. Even where an approved design is immune, a public entity may still face liability for failing to warn of a concealed danger that a careful driver would not anticipate. That distinction keeps many road defect cases alive.
Why Notice Evidence Decides These Cases
Almost every contested road defect case comes down to what the entity knew and when it knew it. That proof lives in records that are not public by default and that are not preserved indefinitely.
The material that matters includes maintenance and repair logs, inspection reports, prior citizen complaints and service requests, internal emails about the location, work orders, traffic engineering studies, and the as-built plans compared against the approved design.
Public records requests and preservation letters go out early for exactly this reason. Roads also get repaired, so the condition that caused the crash may be gone within weeks, and photographs and measurements taken promptly can become the only surviving evidence.
This is work we know well. Our attorneys obtained a $37 million verdict in a case involving dangerous public property, and the firm holds the largest single-plaintiff verdicts in Shasta County and Humboldt County history. Those results came from the records, not from the argument.
FAQs about Government Liability for Dangerous Conditions of Public Property in California
These questions come up constantly once people learn how short the government claim window is.
What if the other driver was also at fault?
Both claims can proceed together. A public entity can be held responsible where a feature of the property increased the danger created by another driver’s conduct, and comparative fault divides responsibility rather than eliminating anyone’s claim.
Does the six-month deadline apply to property damage, too?
Claims for personal injury, death, and damage to personal property all carry the six-month deadline. Other categories generally carry a one-year deadline, which is one more reason not to rely on a rule of thumb.
Is there a filing fee for a government claim?
Claims filed with the state Government Claims Program carry a filing fee, with a waiver or reduction available for people who cannot afford it. Cities and counties handle their own claim forms and fee practices individually.
What if I did not know the road caused the crash until later?
The clock runs from when the cause of action accrues, and delayed discovery can sometimes move that date. Claims administrators typically reject anything filed more than six months after the crash, so the argument usually has to be made through the late-claim process and, if necessary, in court.
Can I file a claim against a special district?
Yes. California has thousands of special districts, many of which control property where injuries happen, and the same six-month rule applies.
Does filing a government claim mean I am suing?
No. Presenting a claim is an administrative step that the statute requires before a lawsuit can be filed. Many claims are resolved at that stage without litigation.
What if a government vehicle hit me rather than a road defect?
The same six-month claim deadline applies. Any claim for money damages against a public entity, including a collision with a county truck or a transit vehicle, runs through the Government Claims Act.
Talk With Us Before the Six Months Run Out
Personal Injury Lawyer, Russell Reiner
If a road defect played any part in your crash, the calendar is already working against you. Six months sounds like plenty of time until you spend the first three in a hospital and a rehabilitation program.
Reiner & Frankel, LLP has represented injured people across Shasta County and Northern California for decades, and our Redding car accident lawyer team can tell you quickly whether a public entity belongs in your case. Consultations are free, we work on contingency, and we never collect until you do.
Call (855) 248-5659 for a free, candid case evaluation.