What Are Some Common Defenses Used in Wrongful Death Cases?

January 15, 2026 Posted In Wrongful Death

Wrongful death claims arise when negligence or misconduct causes a fatal injury. While families file these cases to seek accountability and compensation, defendants (at-fault parties) and insurance companies actively raise defenses to avoid or limit liability. Understanding these strategies can help you anticipate obstacles and prepare for how the case may proceed.

Lack of Negligence

Defendants frequently argue that they acted reasonably and did not cause the death. This defense focuses on denying any breach of duty and reframing the incident as unavoidable. Defendants often claim that they:

Exercised reasonable care under the circumstances.
Followed industry rules or safety standards.
Faced conditions beyond their control.

If the defense convinces the court that no negligence occurred, the court may dismiss the claim.

Challenge Causation

Many wrongful death defenses focus on breaking the link between the defendant’s conduct and the fatal outcome, known as causation. Defendants argue that another factor caused the death instead. Common arguments include:

A preexisting medical condition caused or accelerated death.
An unrelated event intervened after the incident.
A third party bears responsibility for the fatal injuries.

Because causation forms the foundation of wrongful death liability, this defense often plays a central role.

Shift Fault to the Deceased

California allows defendants to assign partial responsibility to the deceased. When defendants succeed, the court reduces the damages awarded to surviving family members. Defendants may allege that the deceased:

Failed to follow safety procedures.
Acted carelessly or recklessly.
Ignored known hazards or warnings.

Even a small percentage of fault can significantly reduce compensation.

Challenge Who Can File the Claim

Defendants often scrutinize whether the plaintiff (surviving family member) has legal standing to bring a wrongful death claim. California law limits recovery to specific relatives and dependents. Defendants may argue that:

The plaintiff does not qualify as a legal heir.
Another surviving relative has priority.
The claimed relationship does not meet statutory requirements.

These disputes can delay the case or restrict who may recover damages.

Minimize the Value of Damages

When defendants cannot avoid liability, they often attack the value of the claim. This strategy aims to reduce compensation rather than defeat the case entirely. Defendants frequently dispute:

Future income and earning capacity calculations.
The value of household services the deceased provided.
Life expectancy and long-term financial projections.

These arguments target both economic and non-economic damages.

Statute of Limitations Defenses

Defendants often attempt to end wrongful death cases by arguing that the plaintiff filed too late. Timing issues can override the merits of the case. This defense may involve claims that:

The filing deadline expired before the plaintiff acted.
Tolling rules do not apply.
Prior settlements or claims bar the action.

Courts strictly enforce deadlines, making this defense especially powerful.

Assumption of Risk

In certain cases, defendants argue that the deceased knowingly accepted specific risks. This defense commonly appears in cases involving dangerous activities. Defendants may point to:

Participation in recreational or sporting activities.
Voluntary exposure to known hazards.
Express or implied liability waivers.

When applicable, this defense can significantly limit or eliminate liability.