California's negligent entrustment law imposes liability on car, truck and motorcycle owners who allow an incompetent, reckless, or inexperienced driver to drive their vehicle.
To prove negligent entrustment of a motor vehicle, a plaintiff must prove 5 things:
- The driver was negligent in operating the vehicle;
- The defendant owned the vehicle or possessed it with the owner's permission;
- The defendant knew, or should have known, that the driver was incompetent or unﬁt to drive the vehicle;
- The defendant permitted the driver to drive the vehicle; and
- The driver's incompetence or unﬁtness to drive was a substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiff.
To help you better understand California's negligent entrustment law, our California personal injury lawyers discuss, below:
- 1. The legal definition of negligence under California law
- 2. The duty of care in a negligent entrustment case
- 3. Defenses to negligent entrustment of a motor vehicle in California
Liability for negligent entrustment is determined by applying general principles of California's law on negligence.
In California, a person is deemed negligent when he or she owes a duty of care to the defendant and fails to act the way a reasonably careful person would in the same situation.
California's duty of care in negligent entrustment cases is set forth in several sections of the California Vehicle Code.
In essence, they prohibit people who own or are in charge of a motor vehicle from knowingly letting someone drive that vehicle if the person isn't licensed or competent to do so.
This includes allowing someone to use a car or vehicle if the owner knows or should know the driver:
- Is drunk or stoned;
- Is underage;
- Does not have a California driver's license;
- Has a suspended or revoked license; or
- Has a medical condition (such as vision problems) that makes it a danger to drive.
The applicable sections are:
California Vehicle Code 14606(a): A person shall not employ, hire, knowingly permit, or authorize any person to drive a motor vehicle owned by him or her or under his or her control upon the highways unless that person is licensed for the appropriate class of vehicle to be driven.
California Vehicle Code 14607:No person shall cause or knowingly permit his child, ward, or employee under the age of 18 years to drive a motor vehicle upon the highways unless such child, ward, or employee is then licensed under this code.
California Vehicle Code14608(a). A person shall not rent a motor vehicle to another person unless both of the following requirements have been met:
- The person to whom the vehicle is rented is licensed under this code or is a nonresident who is licensed under the laws of the state or country of his or her residence.
- The person renting to another person has inspected the driver's license of the person to whom the vehicle is to be rented and compared either the signature thereon with that of the person to whom the vehicle is to be rented or the photograph thereon with the person to whom the vehicle is to be rented.
Potental defenses to civil liability for negligent entrustment include (but are not limited to):
- The owner didn't know and was not on notice that the driver was unfit to drive.
- The driver did not cause the car accident.
- The plaintiff's injuries were not caused by the driver.
- The defendant's entrustment of the vehicle to the driver was consistent with what a reasonable person would do under similar circumstances.
Injured in a car accident in California? Call us for help…
If you or someone you know was injured in a California motor vehicle accident we invite you to contact our California personal injury and accident lawyers for a free consultation.
Call us at (855) 396-0370 or fill out the form on this page to schedule your free consultation with an experienced California accident lawyer.
And know that you pay us nothing unless and until we settle your case or win at trial.
We may also be able to help you if you were the victim of negligent entrustment in Nevada.
- California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI) 724.
- Allen v. Toledo (1980) 109 Cal.App.3d 415; Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Abdullah (1979) 94 Cal.App.3d 81.
- California Civil Jury Instructions ("CACI") 400. See also California Civil Code section 1714(a) ("Everyone is responsible, not only for the result of his or her willful acts, but also 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, except so far as the latter has, willfully or by want of ordinary care, brought the injury upon himself or herself...").
- See also Flores v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 1055; Osborn v. Hertz Corp. (1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 703.
- See, e.g., Richards v. Stanley (1954) 43 Cal.2d 60.
- Allen, note 2; Hartford, note 2.