How Long Do You Have to File a Wrongful Death Claim in California?

Someone has probably told you that you have two years, and that there is no rush. For the ordinary private-defendant branch, Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 (opens in a new window) specifies a two-year period for the civil action, so that answer is often the right one.

It is not a universal deadline, and it is not always the first one to run out. A public-entity claim may need to be presented within six months after accrual, the law's word for when the clock starts, and presenting that claim is a step that comes before any lawsuit. A death claim based on a health care provider's professional negligence follows a different statute and pre-suit notice rule. A survival action is a separate claim that continues the cause of action the person who died held before death. If a potential defendant dies, a separate one-year statute may replace the ordinary period.

So the question worth asking is not how long you have. It's how many clocks your family's situation started, and which of them runs out first. The safe starting point is to write down every claimant, every claim, every possible defendant, and every notice anyone has received, then place each possible branch on its own calendar. Do not wait for probate, an insurer, a criminal case, or a final report to finish before that review begins.

Two years is the ordinary rule, not a universal deadline.

Section 335.1 covers a civil action arising from a person's death due to another's wrongful act or neglect. The statute gives a two-year period, but it does not by itself tell you the day that period started running, and it does not by itself resolve every accrual or exception question.

Put the date of death on a calendar today and use it as your conservative working date unless a lawyer verifies a different claim-specific accrual rule. Also record the event that allegedly caused the death, when each person who may be a claimant first suspected possible wrongdoing, and any fact that may support a different analysis.

The date an insurer opened a claim, the day someone requested records, a settlement discussion, or a legal opinion given later does not replace the date for filing a civil action. And a complaint filed near the end of the period must still identify the proper parties and viable claims, which is work that takes time you won't have if the period is nearly gone.

Who you would be suing decides which clock you are on.

You are probably still using descriptions such as “the hospital,” “the city bus,” or “the contractor.” Start instead with legal names and roles. Work out whether each possible defendant is private or public, whether the alleged conduct falls within professional services by a health care provider, and whether an individual defendant has died.

One death may involve more than one branch, which means more than one deadline. If a private driver and a public roadway condition are both in the picture, those two do not necessarily follow the same procedure. A private facility, licensed provider, and public hospital may raise different defendant and claim questions. Federal, tribal, maritime, workers' compensation, product, or other specialized claims can also carry rules outside the ordinary California calendar and need separate review.

If a public agency may be responsible, a six-month step generally comes first.

For a cause of action relating to death or personal injury, Government Code section 911.2 (opens in a new window) generally sets a six-month period after accrual for presenting the claim to the correct public entity. That presentation is a statutory pre-suit step, not the lawsuit itself, which means you can miss it entirely while carefully counting toward a two-year date.

Identifying the correct entity and following the required presentation method matter. A letter to an employee, a police report, an insurance form, or a complaint to a regulator does not necessarily satisfy the Government Claims Act, even where it felt at the time like putting the agency on notice.

The presentation must also account for each wrongful-death claimant, which means a claim presented by one of you does not automatically cover the rest of you. A claim made only for one heir's personal loss, or a claim limited to the decedent's pre-death injury, should not be assumed to preserve a different heir's wrongful-death claim.

If the entity gives a written rejection notice that complies with Government Code section 913, section 945.6 (opens in a new window) generally requires suit no later than six months after the notice is personally delivered or deposited in the mail. If compliant notice is not given, the statute states a different period. Preserve the claim, proof of presentation, acknowledgment, rejection, envelope, email metadata, and delivery dates.

If you have already counted back and six months has gone by, that is not automatically the end of it. But late presentation is not available indefinitely. Section 911.4 (opens in a new window) permits an application for leave only for certain claims, within a reasonable time, and no later than one year after accrual. That procedure has separate requirements and does not guarantee relief. If six months may have passed, prompt review is still necessary.

A death blamed on medical negligence may not be on the two-year clock at all.

When a death claim is based on a health care provider's professional negligence, Code of Civil Procedure section 340.5 (opens in a new window) generally requires an action within the earlier of three years after the date of injury or one year after the plaintiff discovers, or through reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury. The word doing the work in that sentence is earlier.

For a wrongful-death claim under that statute, the California Supreme Court's decision in _Larcher v. Wanless_ (opens in a new window) treats the injury as the death and its allegedly negligent cause. The outer branch is therefore three years from death. The shorter branch is one year after the plaintiff actually discovers, or reasonably should discover, the death and its allegedly negligent cause. That can mean the year began on the day you first had reason to connect the death to the care, not the day someone confirmed the connection for you. Section 340.5 also contains limited tolling grounds and separate minor provisions.

Code of Civil Procedure section 364 (opens in a new window) generally requires at least 90 days' prior notice before an action based on a health care provider's professional negligence is commenced. That notice interacts with the deadline in a way that is easy to get backwards, so do not assume sending it early buys time. Under _Woods v. Young_ (opens in a new window), notice served during the final 90 days of section 340.5's one-year period tolls that period for 90 days. Earlier notice does not create that tolling. The claim must first fit the statute's definition, and the notice, service, and filing dates require case-specific review.

Survival claims and deceased defendants create different clocks.

A wrongful-death claim compensates eligible statutory claimants, which may include you, for their own losses. A survival action continues a cause of action the person who died held before death, so its underlying accrual and limitations period may differ.

Code of Civil Procedure section 366.1 (opens in a new window) covers what happens if the person who was going to bring the claim dies first. It applies when a person entitled to bring a claim dies before the applicable limitation expires and the cause of action survives. It allows the action to be commenced before the later of six months after the person's death or the period that would have applied had the person lived. It does not revive an underlying claim that had already expired.

Section 366.2 (opens in a new window) addresses the reverse situation, in which a person against whom a surviving liability may be asserted dies before the applicable period expires. It generally provides one year after that person's death and restricts tolling, subject to the provisions it identifies. If you learn that someone you might have sued has died, put that date on the calendar the day you learn it.

Probate Code sections 550 through 554 (opens in a new window) create a narrow insurance-only route, which is worth knowing about if you have been told the case died with the defendant. When the otherwise applicable period remained open at the defendant's death, section 551 can permit an action against the estate within one year after that period expires. The insurer must be served, and recovery is limited to available insurance unless the claimant also joins a personal representative and follows the applicable creditor-claim process. This route requires its own pleading, service, coverage, and timing review.

Estate authority and creditor-claim procedures may matter, but they should be coordinated with the civil calendar rather than treated as an automatic pause. The claim comparison explains the distinct claimants and loss periods.

A timely wrongful-death complaint should not be assumed to make a later survival claim timely. The claims belong to different parties and compensate different injuries, so each must satisfy its own filing calendar.

Discovery, tolling, and other proceedings cannot be assumed to extend time.

A later accrual or tolling argument is a legal conclusion tied to the governing claim, not something you can settle for yourself from an article, this one included. Record exactly what each claimant knew, when the information was learned, which records were available, and why possible wrongdoing could not reasonably have been suspected earlier. Do not move your working date based on a general discovery-rule summary.

Likewise, do not assume the civil deadline pauses because:

• police or prosecutors are investigating
• a criminal case, inquest, or restitution process is pending
• an insurer opened a claim or settlement discussions continue
• medical, coroner, employment, or incident records have been requested
• probate has not opened or no representative has been appointed
• a death certificate, autopsy, toxicology result, or expert opinion is still pending

Every one of those may produce important evidence, and wanting it before making a decision is reasonable. They still do not share one civil filing calendar. The broader guide to California personal-injury deadlines explains the ordinary injury branches without replacing a death-claim review.

Build one written calendar for every claim and defendant.

Write the authority next to every date, and mark the ones that are assumptions or that depend on a document nobody has yet. A date without the rule and facts that produced it is not a reliable deadline. It is a guess you will act on.

Evidence may have an earlier practical deadline than any lawsuit, and it is the part that will not wait until you feel ready. Video can be overwritten, a vehicle or product can be altered, and witnesses become harder to locate. The injury-evidence guide offers a source-map method for recording the custodian, time window, and original format without assuming what exists or what it proves.

Official Sources

• California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 (opens in a new window)
• California Code of Civil Procedure § 340.5 (opens in a new window)
• California Code of Civil Procedure § 364 (opens in a new window)
• California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 366.1 and 366.2 (opens in a new window)
• California Probate Code §§ 550 to 554 (opens in a new window)
• California Government Code §§ 911.2 and 911.4 (opens in a new window)
• California Government Code §§ 945.4 and 945.6 (opens in a new window)

Have the earliest plausible deadline reviewed promptly.

Create one chronology with the event, death, discovery, presentation, rejection, notice, filing, and evidence-risk dates for every claim and defendant. Bring that chronology and the original notices, including the letters and the envelopes they arrived in, to a consultation. Initial consultations with Boyadzhyan Legal Shield are free, confidential, and carry no obligation to hire the firm. The firm's wrongful death practice can review which branch applies without treating the ordinary two-year rule as a promise about the date in a particular case. If you've been putting this off because you're afraid the answer is that you already waited too long, the answer is still a date, and a date can be checked.