Definition
The eggshell plaintiff rule (also called the thin skull rule) is a principle of California tort law providing that a defendant takes the plaintiff as they find them — meaning the defendant is responsible for the full extent of harm suffered by the plaintiff even if a pre-existing condition made the plaintiff unusually susceptible to injury.
In California Rear-End Collision Cases
In rear-end collision cases, the eggshell plaintiff rule frequently applies to victims with pre-existing degenerative disc disease, prior cervical injuries, osteoporosis, or other conditions that make them more susceptible to injury from an impact that might not injure a healthy person. The defendant rear driver cannot argue that the impact would not have injured a 'normal' person — they must compensate for the full extent of injury to the actual victim.
California Law Context
California rear-end collision law applies this concept within the framework of Vehicle Code Section 21703's rebuttable presumption of fault, the eggshell plaintiff rule, pure comparative fault from Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975), the two-year statute of limitations under CCP Section 335.1, and uncapped economic and non-economic damages.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Eggshell Plaintiff Rule in California rear-end collision law?
The eggshell plaintiff rule (also called the thin skull rule) is a principle of California tort law providing that a defendant takes the plaintiff as they find them — meaning the defendant is responsible for the full extent of harm suffered by the plaintiff even if a pre-existing condition made the plaintiff unusually susceptible to injury.
How does Eggshell Plaintiff Rule affect a California rear-end collision claim?
In rear-end collision cases, the eggshell plaintiff rule frequently applies to victims with pre-existing degenerative disc disease, prior cervical injuries, osteoporosis, or other conditions that make them more susceptible to injury from an impact that might not injure a healthy person. The defendant rear driver cannot argue that the impact would not have injured a 'normal' person — they must compensate for the full extent of injury to the actual victim.
How does this interact with California's pure comparative fault system?
Eggshell Plaintiff Rule interacts with California's pure comparative fault system from Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) in rear-end collision cases. Even when Eggshell Plaintiff Rule reduces or complicates the plaintiff's claim, California's pure comparative fault allows recovery so long as the plaintiff was not 100% at fault. Recovery is reduced proportionally by any plaintiff fault, but the Eggshell Plaintiff Rule principle generally operates to preserve the plaintiff's right to recover.