Prosecutors blame the SUV driver for the September 15 crash, but a Chatsworth bus accident lawyer also examines Metro, the bus design, and the intersection. California lets families pursue every party whose fault contributed to the harm, and they have six months to present a claim against Metro.
Westlake Injury Law is a personal injury firm in Westlake Village that represents injured people and grieving families across Ventura and Los Angeles counties. Russ Ercolani founded the firm in 2009. Three days after the crash, Russ and senior associate Melissa Emerson sat down on camera to work through the legal questions it raises. This article follows their conversation and checks each point against California law.
If you were hurt on the bus or lost a family member in a crash like this one, call Westlake Injury Law at (805) 338-6880 for a free consultation. Russ meets every new client personally at that first meeting.
What Happened at Nordhoff Street and De Soto Avenue on September 15
Just after 5 p.m. on Tuesday, September 15, 2026, a gray 2004 Ford Expedition was heading south in the northbound lanes of De Soto Avenue. According to the Los Angeles Police Department, it ran the red light at Nordhoff Street and slammed into an eastbound Metro Line 166 bus. A crash with a public bus follows different rules, and those rules shape every bus accident claim that comes out of it.
The impact threw one passenger out of the bus and partially ejected a second. Daniel Castillo, 46, died on the bus, and Gage Weida, 31, died in the street. Six people went to hospitals, including the SUV driver and the bus operator. Detectives from the LAPD Valley Traffic Division in Panorama City are leading the investigation.
The Criminal Case Against the SUV Driver
The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office charged Bailee Lynn Rios, 36, of Simi Valley, with two counts of murder. Prosecutors added felony driving under the influence of a drug causing injury and reckless driving. District Attorney Nathan Hochman said she had hard drugs in her system and was speeding. The charges describe drug impairment, not alcohol. As of September 22, the court had postponed her arraignment at the San Fernando Courthouse four times while she received medical treatment. She has entered no plea, and the law presumes her innocent.
The News Helicopter Crash Less Than a Mile Away
Just before 7 p.m., the NewsChopper4 helicopter covering the scene went down in a self-storage lot at 9151 Mason Avenue. Angel City Air operated the Airbus AS350 B2 for NBC4 and Telemundo 52. The crash killed reporter Eliana Moreno, 38, pilot George Marciniw, and Edy Gutierrez Mejia, 29, who was on the ground. Prosecutors have not charged Rios in the helicopter deaths.
Why the SUV Driver's Insurance Cannot Cover a Crash This Size
Melissa Emerson called the crash a bar exam question and broke it into parts. "Even if she has insurance coverage, there's no amount of money that she carries that's going to be enough to compensate these families," she said. Vehicle Code section 16056 sets minimum liability limits at $30,000 per person and $60,000 per accident for policies issued or renewed since January 1, 2025.
If her policy carried only those minimums, that $60,000 would have to stretch across two families and every injured passenger. A lawyer looks for every other source of payment.
- The SUV driver's liability policy pays only if it was in force on September 15.
- A passenger's own uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage can apply under Insurance Code section 11580.2, subject to policy exclusions.
- Metro can owe damages if the evidence shows that the bus or its operator added to the harm.
- Criminal restitution under Penal Code section 1202.4 reaches economic losses, but only after a conviction.
Which sources apply depends on policy language and facts a lawyer has to review. Civil Code section 3294 also allows punitive damages on clear and convincing proof of despicable conduct in conscious disregard of others' safety, as our article on how impaired driver cases work explains.
Could Metro Share Fault for the Chatsworth Bus Crash?
The SUV driver may carry nearly all the blame, "but maybe not 100%," said Russ Ercolani. Under California Civil Code section 2100, a carrier of persons for reward must use "the utmost care and diligence for their safe carriage." The California Supreme Court applied that duty to public transit in Lopez v. Southern California Rapid Transit District (1985), and Metro is that district's successor agency.
That standard does not make Metro liable just because someone got hurt. It requires Metro to use "the highest care and the vigilance of a very cautious person," in the words of California's CACI 902 jury instruction. Nothing reported so far shows any shortfall.
Questions Russ Raised About the Bus and Its Operator
Russ walked through the questions his firm asks in every transit case. None of them assumes the operator did anything wrong, and none of them excuses the SUV driver. Each one tests whether someone else made the injuries worse.
- The bus equipment matters, including whether riders had seat belts and whether anyone told them to buckle up.
- The operator's lookout matters, since a cautious driver scans cross traffic even on a green light.
- Traffic conditions matter, including whether a backup forced the bus to stop inside the intersection.
Why a Small Share of Fault Can Matter Under Proposition 51
Russ raised joint and several liability, and California splits that rule in two. Voters passed Proposition 51 in 1986, and it now sits in Civil Code section 1431.2. It changed how courts divide damages when more than one party shares the fault. That split explains why lawyers look for every responsible party, even when one driver clearly started the crash.
Economic Losses Stay Joint and Several
Economic damages cover medical bills, lost wages, and funeral costs. Under Civil Code section 1431 and DaFonte v. Up-Right, Inc. (1992), each at-fault defendant remains liable for all of them. Suppose a jury put 90% of the fault on one driver and 10% on a second defendant. The second defendant could still owe the full economic award.
Noneconomic Losses Follow Each Party's Percentage
Noneconomic damages cover pain, emotional distress, and the loss of a loved one's companionship. Section 1431.2 makes each defendant's share of these damages "several only," tied to its own percentage of fault. In the same example, the 10% defendant would owe only 10% of that award. How a jury divides fault turns on evidence a lawyer has to review, and nobody can predict those numbers this early.
Why a Chatsworth Bus Accident Lawyer Asks About Seat Belts on Metro Buses
Seat belts drew one of the sharpest exchanges in the video, and the two ejections make the question real here. Russ described a hypothetical 20-year-old passenger left quadriplegic by a crash like this one. "Is that the reason this accident happened? No. But does it play a contributing role to why that person is so catastrophically injured? Yes," he said.
He framed the stakes in terms of care. "It's not a need for money. It's a need for care," Russ said. A catastrophic injury such as a spinal cord injury can require medical support for decades.
What Federal Safety Standards Require on Large Buses
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208, at 49 CFR 571.208, paragraph S4.4.5.1, requires passenger seat belts on buses over 26,000 pounds built on or after November 28, 2016. The same paragraph exempts transit buses, school buses, and perimeter-seating buses. A transit bus needs crash protection for the driver's seat only, so a city bus can meet federal law with no passenger belts.
Why an Exemption Does Not End the Design Question
A product liability claim asks whether a design created an unreasonable risk of harm. Whether that claim could reach a bus maker that met the federal standard depends on expert testimony and federal preemption rules a lawyer has to evaluate. Nobody has alleged a design defect in this crash, and the question stays open until experts examine the bus itself.
What Evidence Disappears First After the Nordhoff Street Crash
"This is why we hire experts right off the bat," Melissa said. She listed security cameras, a private investigator, and preservation letters asking each party to keep the black box data. Our article on the role of expert witnesses explains what reconstruction and medical experts add.
"You've got to act really quickly in a case like this," Russ said, because camera systems overwrite old footage. A preservation letter in this crash would go to several places.
- Metro would receive a demand to keep onboard video, operator records, and maintenance files for the bus.
- The owner of the Ford Expedition would receive a demand to keep the vehicle and its event data recorder.
- Businesses along Nordhoff Street and De Soto Avenue would receive requests to save their camera footage.
- The City of Los Angeles would receive a request to keep the signal timing records for the intersection.
Crash Data Under Vehicle Code 9951
Many vehicles carry an event data recorder that logs speed and braking before a crash. California Vehicle Code section 9951 bars anyone other than the registered owner from downloading that data from vehicles made on or after July 1, 2004. The exceptions include the owner's consent and a court order. A preservation letter puts the holder on notice not to destroy the data while a lawyer secures one of those routes.
Security Video and the LAPD Collision Report
Nearby security cameras captured the impact. Footage that nobody requests can vanish on a routine overwrite cycle. Because this crash involved an arrest and deaths, LAPD releases its collision report only by mail and asks requesters to allow at least 45 days. Russ added that police focus on who caused a crash, while a civil claim also needs every party whose conduct made the injuries worse.
Is the SUV Driver Responsible for the NewsChopper4 Crash?
Melissa asked the question every law student would spot. Is there "any argument that we can make that she's also potentially liable for this helicopter incident?" Russ answered carefully. "I think the answer would be no," he said.
He started with the but-for test. But for the bus crash, the helicopter would not have been overhead, and that test alone would point toward liability. California asks a harder question than that, though. The answer turns on foreseeability, and on whether a court sees the helicopter crash as part of the same chain of events.
The Substantial Factor Test and Superseding Cause
California juries decide causation under CACI 430, which asks whether conduct was a substantial factor in causing the harm. That means "more than a remote or trivial factor," though not the only cause. Under CACI 432, a defendant escapes liability only by proving that a later act was a highly unusual or extraordinary response that caused a different kind of harm. Russ reasoned that a driver can foresee a fatal crash, but not a news helicopter falling into a parking lot about half a mile away.
No California court has applied these rules to a crash like this one, and the National Transportation Safety Board findings will shape the analysis.
Other Claims Tied to the Helicopter Crash
The helicopter deaths raise their own claims, separate from the bus. News reports say Moreno and Marciniw both worked for Angel City Air, and that employment changes where their families can turn. Edy Gutierrez Mejia was not part of the crew, so the workers' compensation bar does not reach that family's claims against the operator and anyone else at fault.
Workers' Compensation for the Crew and the Bus Operator
Labor Code section 3602 makes workers' compensation the "sole and exclusive remedy" of an employee or dependents against the employer. If the crew members were Angel City Air employees, their families generally cannot sue Angel City Air in court. The same rule limits the injured bus operator's claim against Metro, but it does not stop the operator from pursuing the SUV driver.
Claims Against Parties Other Than the Employer
Labor Code section 3852 preserves an injured worker's right to sue any person other than the employer. That can include a manufacturer or a maintenance provider if investigators find a mechanical cause. Airbus Helicopters is assisting the NTSB, and the preliminary report expected around mid-October should narrow the questions.
Who Can File a Wrongful Death Claim After the Chatsworth Crash?
Wrongful death claims belong to specific family members named in the statute, not to everyone who grieves. Russ called these "very harsh and strict black and white rules about who can bring a lawsuit for wrongful death." Melissa's reply was simpler. "The law has to draw a line at some place," she said.
The same rules will decide who can bring claims for each of the five people who died on September 15 in the bus and helicopter crashes. Our wrongful death practice starts every case by confirming who holds the claim.
The Order California Follows Under Section 377.60
Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60 sets a strict ranking, and Russ's example shows how hard it can land.
- A surviving spouse, registered domestic partner, or child of the decedent can file.
- If the decedent left no children or grandchildren, the people who would inherit by intestate succession can file, which can include parents alongside a spouse.
- Stepchildren, parents, a putative spouse, or legal guardians if the parents have died can file when they depended on the decedent for support.
In Russ's example, a person who dies with one estranged child leaves that child as the only claimant, even when the person's own parents spoke with them every day. Section 377.60(b) lets those parents sue only if they relied on the decedent financially, which a lawyer confirms from the family's records.
What a Wrongful Death Award Covers and What It Leaves Out
Melissa called the damages rules "kind of backwards." "You don't get compensated for your grief," she said. California's jury instruction, CACI 3921, confirms it. Jurors may award the loss of love, companionship, comfort, care, protection, affection, society, and moral support, plus economic losses such as financial support and funeral costs. The instruction bars damages for grief, sorrow, or mental anguish.
The Survival Claim Window That Closed on January 1, 2026
A survival action lets the estate recover losses the person suffered before death. Code of Civil Procedure section 377.34 allowed recovery of the person's pain and suffering only in cases filed from 2022 through 2025. Senate Bill 29 would have extended that window, but it went to the inactive file on September 13, 2025, and never passed. An estate filing now can still recover pre-death economic losses, but Government Code section 818 bars punitive damages against a public entity such as Metro.
How Long Chatsworth Crash Victims Have to File Claims
Two different clocks started running on September 15, 2026. Claims against Metro follow the Government Claims Act, and claims against private parties follow the general statute of limitations. Missing either deadline can end a claim no matter how strong the evidence is.
Each clock can shift based on when a claim accrues, so a lawyer confirms the exact dates for each family. Our article on claims against public agencies covers the Government Claims Act in other settings. The Metro deadline arrives first, and at six months it leaves the least room for delay.
Presenting a Claim to Metro Within Six Months
Government Code section 911.2 gives families six months to present a claim for death or personal injury to a public entity. For this crash, that deadline falls on March 15, 2027. Section 945.4 bars a lawsuit against Metro until the family presents a written claim and Metro rejects it or lets the time run. A late-claim application under section 911.4 can buy up to one year, and section 911.6 lists the grounds on which Metro must grant it.
How Metro Accepts Claims
Metro's Legal Services page says it accepts completed claim forms only in person or by mail, including USPS, FedEx, and UPS. Metro rejects and denies any claim sent by email. The printed form directs mail to One Gateway Plaza, Mail Stop 99-PL-4, Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952.
What Happens After Metro Responds
Government Code section 912.4 gives Metro 45 days to act on a claim. The response, or the lack of one, sets the next deadline, and the two paths lead to very different dates. A lawyer tracks both dates from the day the claim goes out to Metro.
A Written Rejection Starts a Six-Month Clock
If Metro sends a written rejection under Government Code section 913, section 945.6 gives the claimant six months from the mailing or delivery date to file suit. That window can close well before the two-year mark for private parties. Missing it can end the claim against Metro entirely.
Silence Counts as a Rejection After 45 Days
If Metro does not act within 45 days, section 912.4 treats the claim as rejected on the last day. Without a written notice, section 945.6 allows up to two years from the date the claim accrued to file suit. That longer window applies only when Metro sends no written rejection.
Two Years for Claims Against Private Parties
Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 gives two years to sue for injury or death caused by another person's wrongful act or neglect. For claims against the SUV driver or a manufacturer, that period generally runs to September 15, 2028. Other statutes can lengthen or shorten a deadline in specific situations, which is why a lawyer checks every date against the facts.
Talk With a Chatsworth Bus Accident Lawyer at Westlake Injury Law
Maybe you rode the Line 166 bus, lost someone on September 15, or got hurt in the helicopter crash. A Chatsworth bus accident lawyer can review what happened and explain your options.
Call Westlake Injury Law at (805) 338-6880 for a free consultation. The office sits at 4165 E. Thousand Oaks Blvd, Suite 350, Westlake Village, CA 91362, and the firm represents clients across Ventura and Los Angeles counties.
You can also send your case details through our contact page. The six-month Metro deadline for this crash falls on March 15, 2027.
For more case information visit Los Angeles County District Attorney’s September 17 announcement.
Questions Families Are Asking After the Chatsworth Crash
These are the questions injured passengers and families ask most often after a transit crash like this one. Each answer reflects California law as of September 2026. Your own situation may differ, so treat these answers as a starting point for a conversation with a lawyer.
Can bus passengers sue Metro if another driver caused the crash?
Passengers can present a claim to Metro, but Metro pays only if evidence shows that Metro or its operator contributed to the harm. A claim against the SUV driver runs separately under ordinary negligence rules.
Does the criminal case decide the civil case?
No. A civil claim uses the lower preponderance of the evidence standard under Evidence Code section 115. A felony conviction can still serve as evidence in the civil case under Evidence Code section 1300.
How do I get the police report for this crash?
People involved in the crash and others authorized under Vehicle Code section 20012 can request it by mail. Send LAPD's request form and a $19 check or money order to Records and Identification, P.O. Box 30158, Los Angeles, CA 90030, and allow at least 45 days.
Can the injured Metro bus operator file a claim?
The operator can seek workers' compensation benefits from Metro, which is usually the only remedy against an employer under Labor Code section 3602. Section 3852 still lets the operator pursue the SUV driver and any other outside party at fault.
