[throwaway0a5e]

I kind of took for granted the fact that my customers are typically the party with the money by several orders of magnitude so I don't have to worry much about joint liability even though I live in one of those states.

You're definitely not wrong, "don't be the only party with the money" was one of the things my law professor drilled into us but for a consumer getting their car (or whatever) repaired they don't really have to worry about being the guy with the money since any shop will have a ton of money via insurance and insurance will have a ton of practice defending frivolous claims.

I also forgot the "anyone can sue anyone for anything, doesn't mean they win, doesn't mean it won't cost you money to fight them" disclaimer.

[whoknowswhat11]

Perfect - the best defense BY FAR is to have less / little / no $$.

This is unique in CA - other party can be 90% at fault - so you’d think they’d have to pay (some states do whoever is 51%+ pays). But you can actually be the one paying rather than getting paid even if they hit you.

[dragonwriter]

> This is unique in CA

No its not, its the pure comparative fault rule followed by 13 states.

> - other party can be 90% at fault - so you’d think they’d have to pay

And you’d be right, if you suffered damages. If they were 90% responsible and you were 10% responsible, they’d have to suffer 9× the compensible injury that you did to net anything, because California is a pure comparative fault state.

> (some states do whoever is 51%+ pays).

Incorrect.

Some states do each of:

* Whoever is >0% at fault cannot collect from other parties (pure contributory negligence).

* Whoever is at least 50% at fault cannot collect from other parties (one modified comparative fault rule.)

* Whoever is at least 51% at fault cannot collect from other parties (another modified comparative fault rule.)

None require 51% fault to be required to pay.

[whoknowswhat11]

Let me give you an example - see if you can figure out who will pay and how much. The answer may surprise you.

Husband / driver falls asleep at the wheel while trying to speed home (going 70-80MPH). Weaves and then veers sharply off the freeway, hitting a parked vehicle parked well clear of the roadway and killing themselves, damaging the parked vehicle and causing pain and suffering to driver of parked vehicle.

Wife and family brings suit against driver and company owning parked vehicle for damages including funeral and burial costs, unreimbursed medical expenses, other out-of-pocket expenses, loss of income and financial support, loss of insurance coverage, loss of love, companionship, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, and moral support.

Questions you may wish to consider.

Family bringing case has no money - there is no chance of collection. Guy falling asleep and running off the road was only source of income.

Company owning parked vehicle has money - there is a high chance of collection on any judgement.

Who will pay out in CA. The guy causing the situation by running off the road and smashing into a parked vehicle at 80 MPH? Or the company owning the vehicle he smashed into.

In CA - the answer may surprise you. And the size of awards may surprise you.