Published on:

head-on-collision-attorney-Los-AngelesHead-on collisions are among the most dangerous types of motor vehicle accidents, often resulting in severe injuries or fatalities. In California, a state known for its extensive network of highways and roads, these accidents pose a significant threat to drivers and passengers alike. Understanding the causes, consequences, and preventive measures of head-on collisions is essential for promoting road safety. This blog post delves into the dangers of head-on collisions in California and offers practical advice on how to avoid them.

Understanding Head-On Collisions

A head-on collision occurs when two vehicles traveling in opposite directions crash into each other frontally. The force of impact is often immense due to the combined speed of both vehicles, making these accidents particularly catastrophic. Several factors contribute to the occurrence of head-on collisions, including driver error, road conditions, and environmental factors.

Published on:

In some situations, an employee of a subcontractor on a worksite might be able to file a lawsuit against the employer of another worker who injures them through third-party liability. However, the California Supreme Court has previously held that a company that hires an independent contractor is generally not liable to third parties injured because of the contractor’s negligence while working. In CBRE v. Superior Court of San Diego County, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. D083130, the Court of Appeal decided whether a worker who was injured on a worksite could file a lawsuit against the company that hired the general contractor that subcontracted with the worker’s employer when the worker was shocked by a live wire.

Factual and Procedural Background

Jake Johnson was an electrical foreman employed by PCF Electric (PCF). Property Reserve, Inc. (PRI) owned an office building that needed renovations to prepare for a new tenant. PRI signed the lease agreement with the new tenant on April 9, 2019, with the move-in scheduled for June 1. CBRE managed the building owned by PRI. PRI accepted a bid by Crew Builders to serve as the general contractor and perform the upgrades, and Crew hired PCF Electric as a subcontractor to perform the electrical work.

Published on:

personal-injury-law-CaliforniaPersonal injury law in California is designed to protect individuals who have been physically or psychologically injured due to the negligence or wrongdoing of another party. Navigating the complexities of these laws is crucial for anyone involved in a personal injury case or those simply seeking knowledge about their rights and responsibilities under California law. This guide offers a detailed exploration of personal injury laws in the Golden State.

What Constitutes a Personal Injury?

In California, a personal injury refers to any harm caused to an individual as a result of an accident or injury. This encompasses a range of issues from physical injuries, emotional distress, to mental suffering. The most common scenarios leading to personal injuries include automobile accidents, slip and fall incidents, workplace injuries, defective products, and medical malpractice.

Published on:

Introduction

Navigating the aftermath of a car accident in California can be a daunting journey filled with complex legal, medical, and insurance challenges. With the bustling highways and streets across cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego, the state sees a significant number of vehicular accidents each year. These incidents range from minor fender benders to catastrophic collisions, leaving many to deal with severe injuries, financial burdens, and emotional trauma. This post aims to underscore the importance of securing a skilled accident attorney to guide victims through these challenging times, ensuring they receive the justice and compensation they deserve.

Understanding California’s Traffic Laws and Legal System

Published on:

Service companies, such as an HVAC company or roofing company, often complete projects on-site at residential or commercial buildings. The working conditions in different homes can be unknown or hazardous. Technicians receive safety training to prepare for whatever may come their way, but accidents still happen. When a technician gets hurt while performing a service at a home, is the homeowner or the small business owner responsible for the damages?

A recent case out of Los Angeles put a spotlight on this very topic, and it set a precedent for the courts that can inform us of what to expect if we experience a similar incident.

Learn more about who is responsible when a technician is injured at a client’s home.

Published on:

In California, plaintiffs have the burden of proving all of the elements of negligence when they file personal injury lawsuits. This includes presenting evidence that the defendant’s negligent conduct caused the plaintiff’s injuries and resulting losses. It is often necessary to present expert witness testimony to prove causation. When a defendant objects to a plaintiff’s witness being qualified to testify as an expert, the court must evaluate the witness’s testimony under the substantial factors standard. In Brancati v. Cachuma Village, Inc., Cal. Ct. App. Case No. B321616, the California Court of Appeal considered whether a trial court erred when it found that a plaintiff’s proposed expert witness was not qualified to testify about causation.

Factual and Procedural Background

Dana Brancati signed a month-to-month apartment lease with Cachuma Village, Inc. in 2012 and continued to live there from April 2012 to April 2016. While she lived there, she complained to her landlord about mold in her apartment and the company’s failure to remediate the issue. In 2016, Insight Environmental assessed Brancati’s apartment and found high levels of several species of toxic mold on her premises. She then filed a lawsuit against Chachuma Village, alleging the company had breached the warranty of habitability, constructively evicted her, caused her personal injuries, and committed fraud. Brancati attributed her respiratory illnesses to the toxic mold and claimed $500,000 in damages.

Published on:

California’s vast roadways are guided by the California Vehicle Code (CVC), which sets the standards for how drivers should behave on the road. Let’s dive deeper into some essential sections of the CVC to better understand California’s traffic laws.

1. Cell Phones and Distracted Driving

  • Hands-free Only: Per CVC §23123, drivers are prohibited from holding and using a cell phone unless it’s set up for hands-free use. This includes activities like texting and calling.
Published on:

In California, bars, restaurants, and other establishments that are open to the public owe a duty of care to patrons to keep them reasonably safe and free from danger. This includes a duty to keep customers safe from other, potentially dangerous customers. In

Glynn v. Orange Circle Lounge Inc., Ca. Ct. App. Case No. G061255, the Court of Appeal considered the scope of the duty a bar owed to a guest who was stabbed to death in a fight an hour after he left the bar when the original fight began inside of the bar.

Factual and Procedural Background

Published on:

Employees who are injured at work generally only have the right to recover compensation through workers’ compensation instead of by filing lawsuits against their employers. However, there are a few narrow exceptions that might allow an injured worker to step outside of the workers’ compensation system and file a lawsuit against their employer. In Jimenez v. Mrs. Gooch’s Natural Food Markets, Inc., Cal. Ct. App. Case No. B322732, the Court of Appeal considered whether two exceptions to the exclusive remedy rule applied in a case involving a man who was seriously injured and subsequently died in a pedestrian accident that happened while he was on a short break from work.

Factual and Procedural Background

Timoteo Martinez Ildefonso was employed by a Whole Foods market owned by parent company Mrs. Gooch’s Natural Food Markets, Inc. in Venice, California. Martinez Ildefonso took a 15-minute break, during which he briefly walked off-site. When returning to the store, Martinez Ildefonso crossed a busy road in a crosswalk and was struck by a pickup truck. Following the accident, he walked back to the store. He was given an ice pack by his employer and was asked to fill out a form. He was then given a ride home, and he died several hours later at home from his injuries.

Published on:

Californians who contract diseases caused by exposures to toxins might develop permanently disabling conditions. When those illnesses were caused by someone else’s negligence, the victims are entitled to pursue damages for their losses. In Beebe v. Wonderful Pistachios LLC, et. al., Cal. Ct. App. Case No. F083502, the Court of Appeal evaluated a case to determine whether a plaintiff presented enough evidence to establish causation, a required element of a tort claim in California.

Factual and Procedural Background

Dale Beebe was employed by Braaten Electric, Inc. as an electrical foreman. In 2011, Potential Design, Inc., which was the general contractor on a construction project for two silos for Wonderful Pistachios and Almonds LLC hired Braaten Electric as a subcontractor to complete electrical work, including at one silo under construction in Firebaugh. Beebe worked at the Firebraugh site during two extended phases of the project, including from Jan. 13, 2012, to Dec. 20, 2012, and again from Sept. 12, 2013, to Sept. 26, 2014. During the time Beebe worked in the Firebaugh facility, he lived on the property in his recreational vehicle.

Contact Information