What a Personal Injury Attorney in Los Angeles Checks before a Claim Is Filed

California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 provides a two-year limitations period for an action involving injury to, or death of, an individual caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another.

For many vehicle collisions, premises incidents, and other negligence claims, the limitations analysis begins with this rule. A claim filed after the applicable period has expired may be time-barred unless a recognized tolling rule, delayed accrual principle, or other exception applies.

The date of the accident and the date on which a cause of action legally accrues can therefore matter. A claimant should not assume that every personal injury case can simply be filed within two years of the incident without considering the nature of the claim.

Some injury claims operate under different statutes or procedural requirements.

• Claims against public entities: A claim relating to personal injury or death generally must first be presented to the public entity within six months after the cause of action accrues under Government Code § 911.2.
• Medical malpractice: Code of Civil Procedure § 340.5 generally provides an outside period of three years after the date of injury or one year after the plaintiff discovers, or through reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury, whichever occurs first, subject to statutory exceptions.
• Tolling and delayed accrual: Minority, certain disabilities, delayed discovery, the defendant's absence from California, and other circumstances may affect a limitations analysis, depending on the claim and applicable statute.

Because different causes of action can arise from the same event, the shortest potentially applicable deadline should be identified rather than assuming § 335.1 controls the entire case.

A compliant agreement must identify the contingency rate and explain how costs and disbursements affect both the contingency fee and the client's recovery. It must also address compensation for related legal work that is not covered by the contingency agreement when applicable.

Where the attorney's fee is not otherwise fixed by law, the agreement must state that the fee is negotiable between attorney and client.

These provisions matter because attorney fees are not the only amounts that may be deducted from a recovery. Filing fees, deposition transcripts, medical records, expert witnesses, and other case expenses may accumulate during litigation.

The retainer agreement should be reviewed to determine how litigation costs will be handled. Depending on its terms, the law firm may advance certain expenses, the client may pay them as they arise, or costs may ultimately be deducted from a recovery.

A statement that a client automatically owes nothing whenever there is no recovery can therefore be misleading unless it matches the specific agreement. Attorney fees and responsibility for litigation expenses should be evaluated separately.

The plaintiff files a complaint identifying the parties, factual allegations, causes of action, and requested relief. The summons and complaint must then be properly served on the defendant.

The defendant may respond through an answer or, where procedurally appropriate, challenge the pleading before answering. The applicable response deadline depends on how service occurred and the procedural circumstances.

Discovery allows each side to obtain relevant evidence from the other parties and, in appropriate circumstances, third parties. Written interrogatories, requests for production, requests for admission, subpoenas, and depositions may all become part of this process.

Medical records, photographs, witness testimony, employment records, insurance information, and evidence concerning how the accident occurred can affect both liability and damages. Preserving this material early may become particularly important when physical or digital evidence can disappear over time.

Settlement discussions can occur at different points in a case rather than during a single designated stage. Parties may also participate in mediation or court-related settlement proceedings.

If the dispute remains unresolved, the case may proceed through pretrial motions and ultimately to a jury or bench trial. The actual timeline depends on the issues presented, discovery needs, motion practice, court scheduling, and other case-specific circumstances.

Venue can depend on facts such as where the injury occurred and where a defendant resides. Different considerations may apply to corporations and other entities.

Los Angeles Superior Court also uses local rules to allocate civil cases among judicial districts and courthouses. The amount in controversy or complexity of a case alone should not be used to assume that a particular courthouse, including the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, will handle the action.

California Code of Civil Procedure § 170.6 provides a procedure for seeking disqualification of an assigned judge, court commissioner, or referee without establishing actual bias when the statutory requirements are satisfied.

A qualifying challenge requires a statement under oath that the judicial officer is prejudiced against the party, attorney, or their interests such that a fair and impartial proceeding cannot be obtained.

Timing is particularly important. The applicable deadline can depend on the procedural posture and type of judicial assignment, so § 170.6 should not be treated as creating one universal deadline measured from the date a party first learns the judge's identity.

A § 170.6 challenge also concerns the assigned judicial officer. It should not be confused with a motion concerning venue or the proper courthouse for the action.

Government Code § 911.2 generally requires a claim relating to personal injury or death to be presented to the public entity within six months after the cause of action accrues.

The legal standard is accrual, not simply “six months after the incident.” Although those dates may coincide in many cases, accrual can involve a separate legal analysis.

Missing the initial presentation period also raises issues different from missing an ordinary civil statute of limitations. California law contains procedures governing applications to present certain late claims, but their availability and deadlines depend on the circumstances.