After a pedestrian is struck, the first argument an insurer usually makes is that the person was not in a crosswalk. That argument rests on two misunderstandings of California law that appear in almost every one of these claims — one about where crosswalks exist, and one about what a driver owes a pedestrian who is crossing elsewhere.
This page explains what the Vehicle Code actually provides, what changed in 2023, how fault is assessed, and the deadlines that apply. Our California personal injury attorneys handle these claims from our San Mateo office. For a free consultation, call 650-250-0705.
Do Pedestrians Have the Right of Way in California?
Under Vehicle Code section 21950(a), a driver must yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection. Under section 275, an unmarked crosswalk exists at nearly every intersection where roadways meet at approximately right angles — the prolongation of the sidewalk boundary lines — whether or not anything is painted on the road. Outside a crosswalk a pedestrian must yield to close traffic, but the driver’s duty to exercise due care continues regardless.
Robert B. Vaksman, Esq.
Founding Partner
“Some cases are easier than others, but this doesn’t matter at Vaksman Khalfin, because we have the resources to help our clients no matter what is at stake, especially if it’s hard."
ALAN D. KHALFIN, ESQ.
Partner & Managing Attorney
"People call me when they need to plan, but also when something terrible has happened and they need help. It is personal to my clients, so it is personal to me. We have to help: no matter what."
Key Takeaways
- A legal crosswalk exists at most intersections even with no paint on the ground.
- Section 21950(c) requires a driver approaching a pedestrian in any crosswalk to exercise all due care and reduce speed or take other action as needed.
- Since January 1, 2023, officers generally may not stop a pedestrian for crossing outside a crosswalk unless a reasonably careful person would realize there is an immediate danger of collision.
- That change did not remove the pedestrian’s duty of due care — and the statute expressly says it does not relieve drivers of theirs either.
- Most California injury lawsuits must be filed within two years, with a much shorter timeline where a public entity is involved.
Unmarked Crosswalks Exist Almost Everywhere
This is the single most consequential misunderstanding in pedestrian claims. Vehicle Code section 275 defines a crosswalk as:
The statute adds that there is no crosswalk where local authorities have placed signs indicating no crossing.
So a person crossing at an ordinary residential corner with no paint, no signal, and no signage is generally in a crosswalk for legal purposes, and section 21950(a) requires drivers to yield to them. Most drivers do not know this. Neither do many injured pedestrians, which is why people sometimes accept blame at the scene for something that was not a violation at all.
The rule applies at intersections. It does not create a crosswalk in the middle of a block.
What Drivers Owe, and What Pedestrians Owe
Section 21950 is balanced, and reading only one half of it produces the arguments insurers make.
Subdivision (a) requires the driver to yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing within any marked or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.
Subdivision (b) provides that this does not relieve a pedestrian of the duty of using due care for their own safety. No pedestrian may suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle so close as to constitute an immediate hazard, and no pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in a crosswalk.
Subdivision (c) requires a driver approaching a pedestrian within any marked or unmarked crosswalk to exercise all due care, reduce the vehicle’s speed, or take other action relating to the operation of the vehicle as necessary to safeguard the pedestrian’s safety.
That third subdivision matters. The duty is not merely to avoid striking someone — it is to drive in a way that safeguards them.
What You Can Expect
Free Consultation
At Vaksman Khalfin, we value transparency and offer a free initial consultation. We’ll assess your case, outline achievable outcomes, and chart a probable course of action without any financial obligation on your part.
EXCEPTIONAL ATTORNEYS AND CASE MANAGERS
A professional attorney with a case manager will be assigned to your case to ensure dedicated service and personalized attention. This loyal team is your consistent point of contact and handles all your concerns personally.
YOU ONLY PAY US IF WE REACH A SETTLEMENT
Your satisfaction is our utmost priority. Our payment structure follows a, "No win, no fee," policy. Our policy guarantees our fees are contingent on a successful outcome for your case.
MEDICAL PROVIDERS WON’T RECEIVE PAYMENT UNTIL WE FINALIZE YOUR CASE
We believe in a complete and fair resolution of your case before medical providers get paid. At Vaksman Khalfin, your medical needs are our top priority. Our focus remains on achieving the best outcome for your case.
How it works
We will fight for your rights
Complimentary consultation
We provide you with a complimentary consultation with regard to your matter. If we're mutually interested to work with each other, you will sign an engagement agreement, after which we will get started. Remember, we don't get paid unless and until you get paid.
Working with a Legal team
Our legal team will work with you and your medical providers to ensure that you are effectively treated, as best as medically possible and necessary. Afterward, we serve a pre-litigation demand and negotiate with the defendant. If we don't get what we believe you are owed, we consider going to court.
We will fight for you
If pre-litigation efforts fail, in certain situations, we will continue fighting for you in court. This may take a while, but it will ensure that you get what you deserve.
The Freedom to Walk Act: What Changed and What Did Not
Assembly Bill 2147, the Freedom to Walk Act, took effect January 1, 2023 and amended a series of Vehicle Code sections governing pedestrians, including 21950, 21954, 21955, and 21956.
Each amended section adds substantially the same restriction: a peace officer shall not stop a pedestrian for the covered violation unless a reasonably careful person would realize there is an immediate danger of a collision with a moving vehicle or other device moving exclusively by human power.
The statute is explicit about the limits of that change, and both points appear in the text itself:
- It does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of using due care for their safety.
- It does not relieve a driver of a vehicle from the duty of exercising due care for the safety of any pedestrian within the roadway.
So the Act changed when a pedestrian can be cited. It did not grant right-of-way outside a crosswalk, and it did not alter how fault is assessed in a civil claim. The corollary is equally important: a driver who was speeding, distracted, or otherwise negligent does not escape responsibility because the pedestrian was crossing mid-block.
Crossing Outside a Crosswalk
Section 21954 requires a pedestrian crossing outside a marked or unmarked crosswalk to yield the right-of-way to vehicles close enough to constitute an immediate hazard. Section 21955 provides that between adjacent intersections controlled by traffic signals or police officers, pedestrians must cross only in a crosswalk.
None of that ends the analysis in an injury claim. Failing to yield may support an argument that the pedestrian bears some share of responsibility, which under California’s pure comparative fault approach reduces a recovery rather than barring it. The driver’s own conduct — speed, attention, visibility, whether they could have avoided the collision — remains squarely in issue.
Deadlines
Who May Be Responsible
- The driver, and in some cases their employer where they were acting within the scope of employment
- A rideshare driver, and in some circumstances the platform, in an Uber or Lyft collision — curbside pickups and drop-offs are a recurring source of these incidents
- A commercial vehicle operator or motor carrier, as covered on our truck accident page
- A public entity responsible for the roadway, crossing design, signal timing, signage, or street lighting
- A property owner where a dangerous condition contributed, as covered on our premises liability page
- A vehicle or component manufacturer where a defective product may have failed
Whether any of these parties is legally responsible is a question of evidence rather than assumption.
Damages
There is no preset value for a pedestrian claim, and no attorney can promise a figure. The categories California recognizes include past and future medical expenses, lost income and reduced future earning capacity, pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of consortium in claims brought by a spouse.
A person on foot has no structural protection, so these collisions frequently produce serious harm, including traumatic brain injuries. Where a collision is fatal, certain surviving family members may be able to bring a wrongful death claim, which follows its own rules about who may sue.
Pedestrian Claims in San Mateo and on the Peninsula
Our office at 15 North Ellsworth Avenue, Suite 105, San Mateo, CA 94401 serves people injured across the Peninsula. The pattern here is shaped by the geography: long arterial crossings on El Camino Real, station-area walking around Caltrain stops in San Mateo, Burlingame, Millbrae, and Redwood City, downtown streets where drivers turn across crossings, and residential corners throughout the county where the unmarked crosswalk rule does most of its work.
Where a crossing’s design, signal timing, signage, or lighting may have contributed, responsibility can extend to a city, the county, or a state agency — and that claim runs on the Government Claims Act timeline rather than the two-year period. Because roadway conditions and signal settings can be changed after an incident, documenting the location early matters.
Civil matters for this area are generally heard in the San Mateo County Superior Court. Details about the office are on our San Mateo page, and related explanations are collected in our California personal injury guides. Cyclists struck at crossings may find our bicycle accident page relevant.
How Our California Pedestrian Accident Lawyers Can Help
Vaksman Khalfin, PC can establish whether the crossing was in fact a crosswalk under section 275, answer right-of-way and mid-block arguments with the statutes rather than concede them, identify every party who may be responsible and every policy that may apply including your own uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage, document the injury and its effects with treating providers, and assess whether a public entity claim needs to be presented within its shorter window. If a fair resolution is not offered, we are prepared to litigate.
The firm’s personal injury practice is led by Alan D. Khalfin and Robert B. Vaksman. We handle these cases on a contingency-fee basis: there is no upfront cost, and attorney’s fees are owed only if we recover compensation for you. To talk with a California pedestrian accident lawyer, call 650-250-0705 or schedule a free consultation.
This page provides general information about California law and is not legal advice; reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different, and prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Reviewed by Alan D. Khalfin, Partner and Managing Attorney, Vaksman Khalfin, PC (admitted in California). Last reviewed: 08/12/2026
"I retained Vaksman Khalfin after my car accident. Right away, I knew I was in good hands because communication was clear and fast! They went above and beyond by negotiating my bills, and I ultimately got more than I expected. Thank you!"
"After being in a major accident, I didn’t know what to do. I never had to hire a lawyer, and was nervous about the process. Fortunately, I found Vaksman Khalfin who helped coordinate my medical care and finalize a very fair settlement. Everyone at their law firm was kind, caring and patient with all of my questions."
California Pedestrian Accident Frequently Asked Questions FAQS
No. Under Vehicle Code section 21950(a), drivers must yield to pedestrians crossing within any marked or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection. Outside a crosswalk, section 21954 requires a pedestrian to yield to vehicles close enough to be an immediate hazard. Pedestrians also owe a duty of due care within a crosswalk and may not step suddenly into the path of a vehicle too close to stop.
Under Vehicle Code section 275, it is the portion of the roadway within the prolongation or connection of the boundary lines of sidewalks at intersections where the roads meet at approximately right angles. In practice, a legal crosswalk exists at most ordinary intersections even with no paint on the ground. The exceptions are alley crossings and locations where local authorities have posted signs indicating no crossing.
The rules about where to cross remain, but since the Freedom to Walk Act took effect on January 1, 2023, a peace officer generally may not stop a pedestrian for those violations unless a reasonably careful person would realize there is an immediate danger of a collision with a moving vehicle or a human-powered device.
Possibly. The Freedom to Walk Act states expressly that it does not relieve a driver of the duty of exercising due care for the safety of any pedestrian within the roadway. California also uses pure comparative fault, so a share of responsibility reduces a recovery rather than barring it. A driver who was speeding or distracted remains responsible for their own conduct.
No. It changed when police may stop or cite a pedestrian. It did not grant right-of-way outside a crosswalk, did not remove the pedestrian's duty of due care, and did not change how fault is assessed in a civil claim.
Section 21950(c) requires a driver approaching a pedestrian within any marked or unmarked crosswalk to exercise all due care and to reduce speed or take other action as necessary to safeguard the pedestrian's safety. The duty goes beyond simply not hitting someone.
Uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage on a household auto policy can apply to a pedestrian struck by a motor vehicle, including in some hit-and-run situations, even though no vehicle of yours was involved. It is worth checking the declarations page.
Responsibility may extend to the public entity responsible for the roadway, crossing design, signal timing, signage, or lighting. That claim runs through the Government Claims Act, which requires a written claim to the entity before any lawsuit and operates on a much shorter timeline than two years.
Most personal injury lawsuits must be filed within two years of the injury under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1. If a public entity may share responsibility, a written claim generally must be presented to that entity first, on a much shorter timeline.
Vaksman Khalfin, PC handles these cases on a contingency-fee basis: there is no upfront cost, and attorney's fees are owed only if we recover compensation for you. Initial consultations are free.
