Burn Injury

Published on: October 14, 2025

Burn Injury Claims in California

Burns are among the most devastating injuries a person can suffer. They cause intense physical pain, long hospital stays, repeated surgeries, permanent scarring and disfigurement, emotional trauma, and life-altering disability. If you or a loved one suffered a burn in California because of someone else’s conduct, you may have the right to pursue compensation. This guide explains — in plain language — the common causes and legal theories for burn claims in California, what damages you can recover, the critical deadlines and special rules to watch for, how cases are typically investigated and valued, and practical tips for protecting your claim.

1) Types of burn injuries & common causes

Burns are typically categorized by depth (first, second, third degree) and by the agent that caused them:

Published on: September 15, 2021

CA Supreme Court Rules on Electrical Burn Injury Work Accident

by Steven M. Sweat

When employees of contractors are injured while performing work on behalf of a third party, they generally cannot hold the company that hired the contractors liable for their injuries. However, exceptions exist when the hirer retains control over the safety conditions of the work environment, fails to disclose a hidden, dangerous condition, or affirmatively contributes to the workers’ injuries. In Sandoval v. Qualcomm Inc., Cal. S. Ct., No. S252796 (2021), the California Supreme Court considered whether a hirer has a tort duty to inform individual employees of an independent contractor about hidden safety hazards in the workplace.[1]

Factual and procedural background

Martin Sandoval was an electrical parts specialist who worked for ROS Electrical Supply & Equipment. He was hired by Transpower Testing, Inc. to help Transpower’s president, Frank Sharghi, a licensed electrical engineer, to locate some busbars in the main cogen circuit at Qualcommm Inc.’s campus. Qualcomm had hired Transpower Testing to upgrade the company’s turbines in 2013. Sharghi had previously worked on Qualcomm’s switchgear for more than 20 years.

Published on: August 31, 2020

Starbucks Hot Beverage Case Shot Down by California Court

by Steven M. Sweat

When people are injured by defective products while using them in a reasonably foreseeable manner, they may have the right to recover compensation to cover their losses. However, the alleged defect must have been the direct or proximate cause of an injury for liability to attach. In Shih v. Starbucks Corp., Cal. Ct. App. Case No. B299329, the court considered a case in which the plaintiff’s injury was fairly attenuated from the alleged product defect to determine whether liability should attach.[1]

Factual and procedural background

Tina Shih when to a Starbucks restaurant with a friend. Both ordered cups of tea, and Shih went to retrieve them from the pickup counter when they were ready. Shih noticed that the restaurant had placed the teas inside of double cups instead of using sleeves around the cups. She stated that while they were hot, she carried both drinks back to the table where her friend was seated. After placing the cups of tea on the table, Shih sat down. She took the lid off of her drink and bent forward to take a sip instead of picking it up to take a drink. As she leaned forward, her chair moved backward beneath her, causing her to lose her balance. Shih grabbed the edge of the table to regain her balance, which caused her cup of tea to spill. Shih suffered second-degree burns from the beverage spill and filed a lawsuit against Starbucks for negligence and product liability.

Published on: January 7, 2016

Burn Injury Jury Verdict in California

by Steven M. Sweat

Fire Accident, Burn Injury Burn injury claims are some of the most serious personal injury actions in California. Such was the case in a recent lawsuit involving the severe burning of a minor in a public park has become a precedent setting decision after it was ruled that the defendants in the case, East Bay Regional Park District and Girl Scouts of Northern California, were liable for the injuries caused to 10 year old Fabio Hornischer’s hand and arm in a fire pit.

Circumstances Of The Case

On June 2, 2012, Fabio Hornischer received injuries when his hand and arm slipped into a fire pit that had not been completely snuffed out by the park authorities, even after they had duly inspected the area. Underneath a layer of ashes were several live embers that were still burning, thus causing second and third degree burn injuries to young Hornischer.