Killed or hurt in a police pursuit: who is responsible after a California police chase crash

If someone you love was killed in a police pursuit, or you were badly hurt when a chase came through an intersection, we are very sorry. A police chase crash lawsuit in California is different from an ordinary car accident case. The fleeing driver is usually at fault, but that driver often has little or no insurance. Whether the city, county or State can also be held responsible depends on a specific law, Vehicle Code § 17004.7, and on paperwork the police agency may or may not be able to produce.

This guide explains who can be held responsible, how the pursuit immunity works and what an agency must show to use it, how the answer changes for bystanders, passengers and fleeing drivers, and why early legal review matters more here than in most cases. It is general information, not legal advice.

Who caused the crash? The first question in any police chase case

California law treats a pursuit crash very differently depending on which vehicle caused the harm.

• A police car hit you. Under Vehicle Code § 17001, "A public entity is liable for death or injury to person or property proximately caused by a negligent or wrongful act or omission in the operation of any motor vehicle by an employee of the public entity acting within the scope of his employment." The individual officer is generally not personally liable while driving an emergency vehicle in immediate pursuit (Vehicle Code § 17004), but the agency can be.
• The fleeing car hit you. This is the most common situation, and it is where the pursuit immunity in § 17004.7 can apply. The fleeing driver is still responsible, and so may be the vehicle's owner.
• Officers deliberately stopped the car. Ramming, boxing in, roadblocks and other intervention tactics raise separate questions, including federal civil-rights claims when the force used was unreasonable. Our excessive force guide explains that standard.

Federal civil-rights claims are harder in ordinary chase cases. The U.S. Supreme Court has set a demanding standard for high-speed chases that are not intended to stop a car by force, generally requiring proof that officers meant to cause harm unrelated to making an arrest. Most chase cases are therefore decided under state law.

How California's pursuit immunity works

Under Vehicle Code § 17004.7, a public agency that employs peace officers is "immune from liability for civil damages for personal injury to or death of any person" resulting from "the collision of a vehicle being operated by an actual or suspected violator of the law" who is being, or believes he or she is being, pursued by that agency's officers. The immunity covers the fleeing car's collisions. It does not, by its terms, cover a crash caused by a police car itself.

The immunity is not automatic. Adopting a pursuit policy is "discretionary," but an agency gets immunity only if it does all of the following:

1. Adopts a written pursuit policy that meets the minimum standards in the statute.
2. Promulgates the policy, which must include a requirement that officers "certify in writing that they have received, read, and understand the policy."
3. Provides regular and periodic training on an annual basis covering every subject the policy must address, consistent with state training guidelines.

The written policy must cover at least these subjects: when to start a pursuit and what factors to weigh; how many police vehicles and supervisors may take part; communications; the supervisor's role, including when to call it off; driving tactics; intervention tactics such as blocking, ramming, boxing and roadblocks; speed; air support where available; when to end a pursuit; how to apprehend the person; pursuits that cross into other jurisdictions; and reporting and post-pursuit review.

The statute adds that one officer's failure to sign the certification "shall not be used to impose liability" on that officer or the agency. How courts apply the certification and training requirements to a particular agency's records is a fact-specific legal question, and it is often where these cases are won or lost.

Why the law changed in 2005

The current requirements come from Senate Bill 719, approved on October 4, 2005, and operative on July 1, 2007, according to the chaptered bill. It revised the minimum standards for pursuit policies and added the annual training and written certification requirements.

Families pushed for that change. In Chico, 15-year-old Kristie Priano died after a teenage driver fleeing police broadsided her family's minivan. Her father sued the City of Chico and the police department, the Chico News & Review reported; the police department said its internal review found officers followed protocol. The Priano family went on to campaign for limits on police chases, the Berkeley Daily Planet reported in 2007. Their experience shows how much the immunity can shape a family's case.

SB 719 also requires every police agency to report each pursuit to the California Highway Patrol within 30 days. Under Vehicle Code § 14602.1, those reports must record whether a collision injured or killed an uninvolved third party, and the CHP must report to the Legislature each year on the number of pursuits, how many involved such collisions, and how many uninvolved people were hurt or killed. The pursuit report for your crash is an important early record to request.

Bystanders, passengers and fleeing drivers

Uninvolved bystanders, such as other drivers, their passengers, pedestrians and cyclists, have the strongest claims. They can pursue the fleeing driver and, depending on the facts, the vehicle's owner and any available insurance. Against the agency, the key questions are whether a police car contributed to the crash and whether the agency can actually prove every requirement of § 17004.7.

Passengers in the fleeing car are often in a hard spot. Some had no say in the decision to run. The immunity language covers injury to "any person" from the fleeing car's collision, so a passenger's claim against the agency also turns on whether the agency met the immunity's requirements, and on whether officers used unreasonable force to stop the car.

The fleeing driver faces the most obstacles, including the immunity and his or her own conduct. A claim may still exist where officers used deadly or unreasonable force, for example by shooting into a car or ramming it when that was not justified. Our guide to police shooting wrongful death claims covers the deadly-force rules. If criminal charges are pending, the driver should not discuss the crash with anyone before talking to a criminal defense lawyer.

Why early legal review is urgent in a police chase crash lawsuit

The immunity depends on records the agency controls: the exact version of the pursuit policy in effect on the day of the crash, the training records for the officers involved, and the signed certifications. Those records, along with dash-camera and body-camera video, dispatch audio, GPS and speed data, and the supervisor's notes on whether to end the chase, need to be requested and preserved quickly.

The deadline is also short. A written government claim against a city, county or the State must be presented within six months of the crash or death (Government Code § 911.2), and if it is rejected, a lawsuit generally must follow within six months of the written rejection. Our six-month government claim deadline guide explains how to count it. Federal civil-rights claims, where they apply, generally must be filed within two years. Qualified immunity can be raised by individual officers on federal claims but does not apply to state-law claims; see our qualified immunity guide. Where officers used force to end the chase, the Bane Act may also apply (our Bane Act guide).

After a death, a spouse, children and, in some circumstances, parents or others who depended on the person can bring a wrongful death claim, and the estate can bring a survival claim. Video of a pursuit that ends with an officer firing a gun, or with force causing death or great bodily injury, falls under California's critical-incident video rules; our guide to autopsy reports, records and video explains how to request it.

What to do after a police chase crash

1. Get medical care and keep every record, bill and discharge note.
2. Write down the date, time, exact location, the agencies involved, and the names of officers, tow companies and witnesses.
3. Get the traffic collision report number and request the report.
4. Save photos and video of the scene, the vehicles and your injuries. Ask nearby businesses to keep their camera footage; many record over it within days.
5. Do not give a recorded statement to the agency or any insurer, and do not sign anything, until you have talked to a lawyer.
6. Tell your own auto insurer about the crash and ask what coverage you have, including for uninsured or underinsured drivers.
7. Mark the six-month claim date. We send preservation letters for the pursuit policy, training and certification records, the CHP pursuit report, video and dispatch audio.

How LaCour handles police pursuit cases

LaCour Trial Lawyers is a Pasadena-based trial firm that handles police misconduct and wrongful death in custody cases throughout California. Jonathan P. LaCour, founding partner and lead trial counsel, leads these cases, and Spanish-speaking lawyers are available. There is no fee unless there is a recovery. For reported California outcomes in other police cases, see our police brutality settlements and verdicts page. You can request a free, confidential review.

Frequently asked questions

This guide is general information about California and federal law and about public records as of its date. It is not legal advice, and reading it or contacting us does not create an attorney–client relationship. Allegations in lawsuits are claims, not findings. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Attorney advertising.