CALL US NOW
EMAIL US NOW
California Assembly Bill 2147, signed by Governor Newsom in September 2022 and effective January 1, 2023, decriminalized most jaywalking. Under AB 2147, police may only cite a pedestrian for crossing outside a crosswalk or against a signal when there is an immediate danger of collision. Crossing mid-block in low traffic is not enough. This was a big change from prior law. But it does not give pedestrians unlimited right-of-way. Jaywalking can still affect who is at fault in an accident under California’s pure comparative negligence system.
Key Takeaways
- AB 2147 (effective January 1, 2023) decriminalized most jaywalking: police can only cite pedestrians when there is an immediate safety hazard, not for routine mid-block crossing
- California Vehicle Code Section 21955 still prohibits pedestrians from crossing between adjacent intersections controlled by traffic signals except at marked crosswalks
- California Vehicle Code Section 21950 still requires ALL drivers to yield to pedestrians in crosswalks, marked or unmarked
- Decriminalizing jaywalking does not eliminate a pedestrian’s comparative fault in an accident: crossing illegally may still reduce the pedestrian’s recovery under California’s pure comparative negligence rule (Li v. Yellow Cab Co., 1975)
- Drivers must still exercise reasonable care to avoid striking pedestrians regardless of where the pedestrian is crossing (CVC Section 21954(b))
What the Law Says Now (Post-AB 2147)
California Vehicle Code Section 21955 still states that pedestrians shall not cross a roadway between adjacent intersections controlled by traffic control signals unless crossing at a crosswalk. However, under AB 2147 (which amended Sections 21950, 21954, 21955, and 21956), law enforcement officers should not issue a citation for mid-block crossing unless there is an immediate danger of collision with a moving vehicle.
Drivers still owe a duty of care to all pedestrians in all locations, not just in crosswalks. California Vehicle Code Section 21954(b) states that even a pedestrian outside a crosswalk is still owed reasonable care by approaching drivers. A driver who could have seen and avoided a pedestrian but failed to do so is liable under Civil Code Section 1714.
How Jaywalking Affects Accident Claims
If a pedestrian was crossing outside a crosswalk or against a signal when struck by a vehicle, the pedestrian may be assigned partial comparative fault under California’s pure comparative negligence system. However, comparative fault only reduces the pedestrian’s recovery; it does not eliminate it. A driver who was speeding, distracted, or not watching the road cannot escape liability simply because the pedestrian was also at fault.
Attorney Damoun Yazdi evaluates all pedestrian accidents to maximize recovery, including cases where the pedestrian’s crossing location is disputed.
Delma López
Contact The Accident Network Law Group
Jaywalking-adjacent crashes are some of the most heavily disputed pedestrian cases because insurers try to shift blame onto the pedestrian’s crossing location. Attorney Damoun Yazdi and the team at The Accident Network Law Group investigate the driver’s speed, attentiveness, and duty of care in every pedestrian accident, regardless of where the crossing occurred, to make sure comparative fault is not overstated. We handle pedestrian accident cases throughout Costa Mesa, Riverside, Rancho Cucamonga, Apple Valley, Victorville, Bakersfield, and the rest of Southern California. Free consultations, contingency fee (No Recovery, No Fee). Se habla espanol.
This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The outcome of any case depends on its specific facts and circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Contact The Accident Network Law Group for advice about your individual situation.
