

Discussions of “duty of care” revolve almost exclusively around personal injury. The most common issue examined in these cases is whether a duty of care was owed by one person to another.
Breaching a duty of care is the core of any negligence claim, which is why cases examining duty of care are essentially cases examining whether a person was negligent. A complete claim requires more than breach alone: you must also show that the breach caused your injury and that you suffered actual damages.
For this reason, cases examining duty of care are essentially cases examining whether a person was negligent.
Below, the personal injury lawyers at Well Call Injury Lawyers will go over California Civil Code 1714(a). If you have any questions, please contact us online or call 707-426-5300.
California Civil Code 1714(a) is the statute that puts the everyday duty of care into written law, and it sits at the foundation of nearly every personal injury claim in the state.
Key Takeaways
California Civil Code 1714 makes everyone responsible for injuries caused by their willful acts and by a failure to use ordinary care or skill in managing their property or person.
Duty, breach, causation, damages: it’s a lot of legal language to sort through when all you know is that you got hurt and it wasn’t your fault.
You don’t have to figure out whether the elements of negligence apply to your situation on your own. We’ll review what happened, tell you honestly where you stand, and explain what a claim would involve. No pressure, no upfront costs.
Schedule A Free ConsultationIn California, the ‘duty of care‘ is a fundamental legal concept that imposes a legal obligation on individuals and entities to exercise reasonable care to prevent harm or injury to others. Specifically, it refers to the duty of individuals and organizations to act in a manner that avoids causing harm to others. This duty encompasses a wide range of situations, from everyday activities to professional responsibilities.
To succeed in a California personal injury case, you need to establish several key elements:
Understanding the ‘duty of care’ in California is crucial when pursuing a personal injury claim, as it forms the foundation of your case. By demonstrating that someone owed you a duty of care, breached that duty, caused you harm, and left you with actual damages, you can seek compensation for your injuries and losses.
The State of California set into statutes what is ordinarily a creature of court decisions. California Civil Code §1714(a) set out a “duty of care” that all persons owe to each other, save clear exceptions.
In relevant part, California Civil Code §1714(a) states, “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 . . . .”
Breaking this statute into pieces, a person is negligent when they:
It is hard to pin down the concept of breaching a duty of care, but the California Supreme Court elegantly phrased it whether a person acted as a reasonable person would “in view of the probability of injury to others.”
In this simple statement, we can understand the spirit of what Civil Code §1714 is trying to achieve.
To understand when a person might have a duty of care to another, consider the following examples:
In these examples, we see the common-sense obligations that we owe to our fellow citizens when we act or operate in a certain societal role.
Under California law, individuals are obligated to exercise ‘ordinary care or skill‘ in managing their property and personal affairs.
However, certain individuals owe a distinct ‘special duty of care‘ to others due to their specific relationships. For example, teachers have a special duty of care toward their students, and doctors have a similar obligation to their patients.
In examining cases where there is an alleged breach of a duty of care, California courts examine several factors. While this list is not exhaustive, it can give a flavor of what courts weigh:
The above selected examples demonstrate that the courts weigh many factors. It also demonstrates that courts are very wary of expanding or narrowing the scope of the duty of care unless a clear case to do so is presented.
When another person fails to act responsibly and you’re the one left injured, the legal side of it can feel overwhelming on top of everything you’re already dealing with.
Wells Call Injury Lawyers has recovered over $500 million on behalf of injured clients. We’ll examine what happened, explain your options in plain language, and handle the legal work so you can focus on getting better.
Schedule A Free ConsultationAt this point, you have a good idea of how California evaluates duty of care and some of the many factors that contribute to the analysis.
At Wells Call Injury Lawyers, we thoroughly examine each case and work to protect your rights and collect the money that you are owed for your injuries. In fact, we’ve recovered over $500 million on behalf of injured clients.
Contact us online or call 707-426-5300 today for a free consultation.
California Civil Code 1714 holds people responsible for injuries caused by their own conduct, whether through negligence, recklessness, or intent. Section 1714(a) provides that everyone is responsible for the results of their willful acts and for injuries caused by a want of ordinary care or skill in managing their property or person.
Duty of care is the legal obligation to act with reasonable care so you do not cause harm to others. In California it applies to individuals and organizations alike, covering everything from everyday activities like driving to professional responsibilities like treating a patient.
Essentially, yes. A breach of a duty of care is synonymous with negligence, which is why cases examining duty of care are really cases examining whether someone was negligent. The question is whether the person failed to act as a reasonably prudent person would have in the same situation.
You must establish four elements: that the defendant owed you a duty of care, that they breached that duty, that the breach directly caused your injuries, and that you suffered actual damages such as medical expenses, lost wages, or pain and suffering.
Common examples include a property owner keeping their premises safe for visitors, a driver obeying traffic laws, a parent caring for a child, a doctor treating a patient, and a business owner protecting a patron. Each reflects a common-sense obligation tied to a particular role.
A special duty of care is a heightened obligation that arises from a specific relationship rather than from ordinary interaction. Teachers owe one to their students and doctors owe one to their patients, reflecting the trust and dependence built into those relationships.
Courts ask whether the person acted as a reasonable person would have, as the California Supreme Court put it, “in view of the probability of injury to others.” The focus is on how foreseeable the harm was and whether the conduct measured up to that standard.
Courts consider factors including how closely the conduct is connected to the injury, how foreseeable the harm was, the policy interest in preventing future harm, and the moral blame attached to the conduct. This list is not exhaustive, and courts are cautious about expanding or narrowing the scope of duty without clear reason.
Where to find our Fairfield Office
