In California automobile accidents, concurrent causation refers to a situation where multiple causes contribute to an accident or injury, and some of these causes may be covered by insurance while others may not. Under the doctrine of concurrent causation, if an accident or injury is the result of more than one factor, the courts and insurance companies may evaluate each cause to determine liability. For example, if a collision occurs because one driver runs a red light (an intentional act) and another driver fails to maintain a safe following distance (a negligent act), both actions may be seen as contributing factors to the accident. California courts often apply a comparative fault approach, meaning that each party’s degree of responsibility for the accident is considered when determining damages.
The concept of concurrent causation can become complicated in cases where one cause is excluded from coverage under an insurance policy, such as when an accident is caused in part by an excluded hazard or activity. For instance, if an accident involves a driver who was under the influence of alcohol, and alcohol-related accidents are excluded from coverage under certain insurance policies, the insurer may deny part of the claim, even if other non-excluded factors contributed to the accident. In these cases, California courts will typically assess the evidence and determine if the other causes were significant enough to warrant compensation under the policy. If a single proximate cause is determined to be the primary factor, insurance coverage may be more straightforward, but concurrent causation allows for a more nuanced examination of multiple contributing factors.