Modesto Pedestrian Accident Attorney

Attorney Michael Rehm — (800) 978-0754

Attorney Michael Rehm represents pedestrians injured by vehicles throughout Modesto and Stanislaus County. Pedestrian accidents produce some of the most serious injuries in personal injury practice — a person on foot struck by a car, truck, or motorcycle has no protection against the force of the impact. This page explains the legal framework that applies to pedestrian accident claims filed in Stanislaus County Superior Court and the verified crash data that reflects the scope of Modesto's pedestrian safety problem.

Modesto Pedestrian Accident Data

California's Office of Traffic Safety compiles annual crash data for every city in the state and ranks each city against comparable communities after adjusting for population and miles driven. In 2023, the OTS compared Modesto to 62 California cities of similar size. Modesto recorded 119 pedestrian victims killed or injured — ranking the city third out of 62 comparable cities. Only two cities in the entire comparison group had worse pedestrian safety records than Modesto in 2023.

The under-15 pedestrian category is particularly striking. Modesto recorded 12 pedestrian victims under the age of 15, ranking second out of 62 comparable cities. That means children on foot in Modesto face greater danger than in nearly every other California city its size. Pedestrians 65 and older accounted for 18 victims, ranking fifth.

These figures reflect crashes at signalized intersections, mid-block crossings, and driveways throughout Modesto. McHenry Avenue, Briggsmore Avenue, Oakdale Road, and the commercial corridors along SR-99 frontage roads are among the locations where pedestrian conflicts with vehicles occur regularly.

The Duty of Care to Pedestrians

California Civil Code section 1714(a) imposes a general duty of ordinary care on every person in the management of their property and person. For a driver, that duty requires constant attention to the road and reasonable response to pedestrians who are present or who may reasonably be expected to be present.

Several Vehicle Code provisions establish specific duties to pedestrians that, when violated, constitute negligence per se.

Vehicle Code section 21950(a) requires a driver to yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection. This duty applies regardless of whether the pedestrian has a walk signal. Section 21950(b) also prohibits a driver from passing another vehicle stopped at a crosswalk for a pedestrian.

Vehicle Code section 21952 requires a driver to yield to a pedestrian crossing at any crosswalk, whether marked or unmarked, when the pedestrian is on the driver's half of the roadway or approaching closely enough from the opposite half to be in danger.

Vehicle Code section 21954 addresses pedestrians crossing outside a crosswalk. A pedestrian crossing outside a marked crosswalk must yield to vehicles, but the driver's duty of due care to avoid striking the pedestrian remains regardless of the pedestrian's location. A driver who strikes a jaywalking pedestrian may still be liable if they failed to exercise due care.

Vehicle Code section 22350 requires every driver to operate at a speed no greater than is reasonable and prudent given existing conditions. In areas with pedestrian traffic — school zones, commercial strips, residential neighborhoods — a speed that would be reasonable on an empty road may be unreasonable when pedestrians are present or foreseeable.

Vehicle Code section 21760, the Three Feet for Safety Act, requires drivers passing a bicycle to maintain at least three feet of clearance. This provision is relevant in pedestrian cases where a cyclist strikes a pedestrian on a shared path or sidewalk.

Comparative Fault in Pedestrian Cases

California follows a pure comparative fault system under Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804. The defense will commonly argue that a pedestrian who crossed outside a crosswalk, crossed against a signal, or was wearing dark clothing at night bore some share of responsibility for the crash. Under pure comparative fault, even a pedestrian found partially at fault recovers the portion of their damages attributable to the driver's negligence. The defense may raise comparative fault as an argument, but the jury decides what percentage, if any, applies to the injured pedestrian.

The eggshell plaintiff rule also applies: a driver who strikes a pedestrian with a pre-existing injury or condition is responsible for the full extent of the harm caused or aggravated by the impact, even if the resulting injury is more severe than it would have been for a healthier person.

Hit-and-Run Pedestrian Accidents

Modesto recorded 166 hit-and-run crash victims in 2023, ranking fifth out of 62 comparable California cities. When a driver flees after striking a pedestrian, the injured person may pursue a claim under their own uninsured motorist coverage. Insurance Code section 11580.2 requires UM/UIM coverage to include hit-and-run accidents where there is independent witness corroboration or physical contact between the fleeing vehicle and the pedestrian or a vehicle that then strikes the pedestrian.

Government Entity Liability

When a dangerous intersection design, missing crosswalk markings, failed signal timing, or deteriorated sidewalk conditions contributed to a pedestrian accident, the responsible public entity may be liable under Government Code section 835 for a dangerous condition of public property. A dangerous condition claim against a government entity requires compliance with the Government Claims Act. Under Government Code section 911.2, a claim must be presented within six months of the incident. Under Government Code section 945.6, a lawsuit must be filed within six months after the claim is rejected. Missing the government claims deadline can potentially bar the claim entirely.

Damages

Civil Code section 3333 provides that the measure of damages for a tort is the amount that will compensate for all detriment proximately caused by the negligent conduct. Civil Code section 3281 confirms that every person who suffers detriment from an unlawful act is entitled to compensation. Civil Code section 3283 extends that entitlement to future damages that are certain to result.

Compensable damages in a pedestrian accident case typically include past and future medical expenses, past and future lost earnings or earning capacity, and non-economic damages for pain, suffering, disfigurement, and loss of enjoyment of life. Pedestrian impacts frequently cause traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, and orthopedic fractures that require extended rehabilitation and may result in permanent impairment. Future medical expenses and future lost earning capacity are recoverable where the evidence establishes they are reasonably certain to occur.

Filing Deadlines

California Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 sets a two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims. Missing this deadline can potentially bar a lawsuit. Tolling doctrines may apply depending on the facts — including minority for injured children, the discovery rule, mental incapacity, and fraudulent concealment. Contact Attorney Michael Rehm promptly to assess the specific timeline in your case.

Stanislaus County Superior Court

Pedestrian accident lawsuits filed on behalf of Modesto and Stanislaus County residents are filed in the Stanislaus County Superior Court, City Towers Building, 801 10th Street, Modesto, CA 95354. The court has 21 judges and three commissioners. Civil cases are directly assigned to a single judicial officer for all purposes, including trial. Represented parties are subject to mandatory electronic filing. All general civil cases are required to participate in a mandatory settlement conference approximately 15 days before trial. Stanislaus County Superior Court judicial statistics are available through the California Judicial Council court statistics portal.

Representation on a Contingency Fee Basis

Attorney Michael Rehm handles pedestrian accident cases throughout Modesto and Stanislaus County on a contingency fee basis. No fee without a recovery. Call (800) 978-0754 for a free consultation.

The information on this page is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case turns on its own facts. The law can change — statutes are amended, cases are decided, and regulations are revised; nothing on this page should be relied upon as a statement of current law without verification. Deadlines and legal bars discussed on this page are general guides — whether a particular deadline applies, has run, or is subject to tolling, and whether a particular doctrine bars or limits recovery in your case, requires individual analysis. Contact Attorney Michael Rehm to discuss the specific facts of your situation.