In this article 8 sections
Labor Day is a good moment to think about the people who get hurt doing their jobs. Every year, California workers are injured in falls, vehicle crashes, equipment failures, and countless other incidents on the job. Most of them file a workers’ compensation claim, and many assume that is the only option they have.
Often it is the only claim against the employer. But it is not always the only claim. California law allows an injured worker to pursue workers’ comp benefits and, at the same time, a separate lawsuit against someone else whose negligence or defective product caused the injury. That second claim, called a third-party claim, can make a real difference, because it can recover damages workers’ comp does not pay, such as pain and suffering.
Here is how the two systems fit together in California, and what to watch for.
Why You Usually Cannot Sue Your Employer
California’s workers’ compensation system is a trade. Under Labor Code section 3600, your employer is liable for comp benefits for an injury arising out of and in the course of your employment “without regard to negligence.” You do not have to prove anyone was at fault.
In exchange, Labor Code section 3602 makes workers’ comp “the sole and exclusive remedy” against the employer when the conditions of compensation are met. Courts call this “exclusivity.” It is why most workers cannot file a regular injury lawsuit against their own employer, even if the employer was careless.
The Narrow Exceptions to Exclusivity
The Labor Code carves out a few situations where you can sue your employer directly:
- Willful physical assault by the employer (section 3602(b)(1)).
- Fraudulent concealment by the employer of your injury and its connection to the job, which made the injury worse. Damages are limited to the aggravation (section 3602(b)(2)).
- A defective product the employer manufactured and sold to an independent third person, which a third person then provided for your use (section 3602(b)(3)).
- The power press exception. Under section 4558, a worker may sue when the injury was caused by the employer’s knowing removal of, or knowing failure to install, a point of operation guard on a power press, if the employer specifically authorized it under conditions known to create a probability of serious injury or death.
- No workers’ comp coverage. Under section 3706, if the employer failed to secure workers’ compensation, the injured worker may sue the employer as if the comp system did not apply.
These exceptions are applied strictly, and each has its own requirements.
Who Counts as a “Third Party”?
Labor Code section 3852 says your workers’ comp claim “does not affect” your right to recover damages from “any person other than the employer.” Depending on the facts, a third party might be:
- A negligent driver who hit you while you were driving or making deliveries for work.
- The manufacturer of a defective machine, tool, ladder, vehicle, or safety device.
- A property owner whose dangerous premises caused the injury, such as a store you were delivering to.
- Another company whose negligence caused the injury, depending on its relationship to your employer and the work.
The last two categories come with an important limit, which is where the Privette doctrine comes in.
The Privette Doctrine: When You Work for a Hired Contractor
Many workers are employed by contractors hired by someone else: a roofer hired by a homeowner, a subcontractor on a construction project, a technician sent to a commercial building. When one of those workers is hurt, it might seem natural to sue the property owner or the company that hired the contractor. California law makes that difficult.
In Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689, the California Supreme Court held that a person who hires an independent contractor generally is not liable to the contractor’s employees for on-the-job injuries, in part because those workers are already covered by workers’ compensation. Later cases describe this as a presumption that the hirer delegates responsibility for workplace safety to the contractor.
There are recognized exceptions:
- Retained control. In Hooker v. Department of Transportation (2002) 27 Cal.4th 198, the Court held that a hirer may be liable if it retained control over safety conditions and exercised that control in a way that “affirmatively contributed” to the employee’s injury.
- Concealed hazards. In Kinsman v. Unocal Corp. (2005) 37 Cal.4th 659, the Court explained that a landowner who hires a contractor may be liable if it knew or reasonably should have known of a concealed, pre-existing hazardous condition on its premises, the contractor did not know and could not reasonably ascertain the condition, and the landowner failed to warn the contractor.
A 2026 example
California courts continue to apply Privette broadly. On August 26, 2026, the First District Court of Appeal decided Schurman Family Company TIC v. Superior Court (A174194), a published opinion. A worker for a contractor hired by a warehouse tenant fell through a skylight on the warehouse roof and sued the building’s owner, which had not hired the contractor. The court noted that Courts of Appeal “have come to different conclusions” about whether non-hiring parties are protected, and held that where a lease “expressly contemplates the use of an independent contractor to perform work,” and the tenant then hires one, the non-hiring landlord “falls within the chain of delegation” and, “absent a recognized exception,” is shielded by Privette. The court noted the injured worker had not argued that either exception applied, so it did not decide that question.
The practical lesson: if you work for a contractor, a claim against the property owner or the hiring company usually turns on evidence about who controlled the work, what they did, and what hazards they knew about. That evidence needs to be gathered early.
How Workers’ Comp and a Third-Party Recovery Interact
You do not have to choose between comp and a third-party case. But the two are linked:
- Employer lien. Your employer, or its insurer, may seek reimbursement out of a third-party recovery for the benefits it has paid. Under Labor Code section 3856, the court first pays reasonable litigation expenses and attorney’s fees, and then allows the employer’s lien.
- Credit against future benefits. Under sections 3858 and 3861, the employer is generally relieved from paying further comp benefits up to the amount of your net recovery.
- Recent change for some public-safety workers. Amendments effective January 1, 2026 limit the employer’s share of a third-party recovery, and bar a credit against future benefits, in certain cases involving peace officers and firefighters employed by cities, counties, and fire protection districts.
Because of these rules, settlement of a third-party case needs to account for the comp claim, and vice versa.
What If Your Employer Had No Insurance?
California requires employers to secure workers’ compensation. If yours did not, you have options. You may sue the employer in civil court under section 3706, and in that lawsuit section 3708 presumes the injury resulted from the employer’s negligence and bars defenses such as your own contributory negligence. You may also file for benefits with the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, and if an uninsured employer does not pay an award, section 3716 provides for payment from the Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund, which the Legislature created so that workers employed by illegally uninsured employers are not deprived of benefits.
Deadlines and First Steps
Several deadlines can apply at once:
- Notice to your employer. Labor Code section 5400 refers to written notice to the employer within 30 days of the injury. Report it right away and in writing.
- Workers’ comp proceedings. Under section 5405, proceedings to collect benefits generally must be commenced within one year of the date of injury, or of the last disability payment or medical treatment provided.
- Third-party lawsuits. Most California personal injury lawsuits must be filed within two years under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1. If a public entity is involved, a government claim deadline of six months may apply. Our post on government claim deadlines explains that rule.
In the meantime, get medical care and follow through with treatment, write down what happened and who was there, photograph the scene and any equipment involved, and keep copies of every comp document you receive. If a machine was involved, our earlier post on robot and automated machine injuries covers the product side in more detail.
Get Both Claims Looked At
Workers’ comp does not pay for everything an injury costs. If someone other than your employer contributed to your injury, a third-party claim may be the difference between getting by and being made whole. Learn more on our workers’ compensation page.
If you were hurt on the job in California, contact Reardon Stodolka for a free consultation at 657.522.7122. We will look at your comp claim and any third-party claim together, and you pay nothing unless we recover compensation for you.