California Accident Attorneys Blog

Published on: October 16, 2015

California Truck Accident Jury Verdict

According to sources, a jury in Alameda County recently returned a verdict of $13.7 million for the families of three people who were killed in a truck accident. The verdict was handed down on Friday, Oct. 9 in a case filed against three truck drivers and the trucking companies for whom they worked. Two of the companies were found to be liable, while the third was not.

Facts of the Case

The crash happened on Highway 152 near its intersection with Road 16 on Nov. 27, 2012 in foggy conditions. A Western Milling truck attempted to turn left across the freeway, spanning two lanes. Evidence presented at the trial demonstrated that visibility at the time of the accident was reduced to under 200 feet.

Published on: October 13, 2015

Drug Impaired Driving Accidents in California

by Steven M. Sweat

Drug Impaired Driving Accidents in California are becoming more and more of a problem. Recent studies conducted by the Governors Highway Safety Association show that motor vehicle collisions where drivers are found to be under the influence of illegal narcotics or other drugs have significantly risen in the last decade. These studies have found that 40 percent of all people involved in a car wreck are under the influence of some type of drug. In addition, the study reveals that nearly 64 percent of all fatal car crashes involve the use of drugs.

This study takes into account all legal and illegal drug use. However, marijuana use is the highest reported substance at almost 35 percent, followed by amphetamines (a common drug used for ADD treatments and found in some diet medications) at almost 10 percent. The rest of the drugs that were discovered ranged from pain medications to prescription cough syrups.

Why California Drivers Should Be Alarmed

Published on: October 8, 2015

Los Angeles Jury Verdict: Negligent Repair Causing Injury

by Steven M. Sweat

A recent Los Angeles jury verdict illustrates how negligent repair of a vehicle can cause serious injury for which the repair shop may be held liable. The facts and nature of the ruling were as follows:

Background Of The Case

On September 1, 2015, a California jury awarded Kenneth Fry over $2.1 million in damages for an auto repair negligence suit he filed against Larry Miller Toyota. This is a very significant case because it proves that mechanic negligence has a serious outcome when these actions lead to accidents and personal injuries.

Published on: September 23, 2015

Does Lane-Splitting Cause California Accidents?

by Steven M. Sweat

Does CA "Lane Splitting" Cause Motorcycle Accidents? Los Angeles Injury Lawyer Explains “Lane-splitting” occurs when a motorcyclist between lanes of slow-moving or stopped traffic. This practice is against the law in 49 states and the District of Columbia, and California is the only state in the country that does not have a law specifically outlawing lane-splitting. California also does not have a law specifically stating that lane-splitting is legal and, therefore, many motorists become angry when motorcyclists engage in this behavior. Though lane-splitting can be distracting to motorists and can lead to accidents and injuries, the practice can be safe when done in a prudent and safe manner. If a motorcyclist fails to be careful or reasonable when lane-splitting and a collision occurs, any injured victims should contact a California motorcycle injury attorney as soon as possible to discuss a potential case.

Motorists can take precautions to avoid accidents

Motorcyclists are not the only ones who can cause accidents and injuries when lane-splitting occurs, as motorists can also behave in a negligent manner and cause injury to motorcyclists. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) offers several guidelines¹ directed at motorists for safe lane-splitting practices. Some of these guidelines include as follows:

Published on: September 22, 2015

Los Angeles Pedestrian Awarded $3 Million

by Steven M. Sweat

In the Los Angeles case of Joesph Butenhoff v. Rae Anne Bautista, the jury demonstrated how just because a police report states that one party is at fault doesn’t mean that the other party won’t still have to pay repercussions for their actions in court. In this particular case the plaintiff was a pedestrian, and the defendant was the operator of a mobile vehicle. The plaintiff was reportedly in the street after dark helping a dog owner and his injured dog when the defendant struck him with her vehicle. The pedestrian suffered a traumatic brain injury as a result of the accident.

He Said

According to the plaintiff, the defendant failed to watch the road, and she had been present in the lane with the injured dog and his owner while other vehicles were passing slowly by the scene in the adjacent lane. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant kept driving in the lane that contained himself, the injured dog and the dog’s owner to pass the other vehicles in the slower moving lane and then struck him when she swerved to avoid hitting the dog.

Published on: September 3, 2015

San Bernardino Wrongful Death Jury Verdict

by Steven M. Sweat

On July 30, 2015 a verdict was finally given regarding a case of a 15 year old boy who died after being hit by a car at a dangerous crossing while heading for the school bus stop in San Bernardino County California. The jury awarded the adoptive mother of the boy $20,000,000.00 for her losses.

Summary Of Facts In The Case

In December of 2010, the 15 year old high school sophomore was on his way to his designated school bus stop which required him to cross an uncontrolled five-lane highway. This bus stop was designated by the school system and was the only stop that the young man could use to get to school. During his attempt to cross the highway, the boy was struck by a vehicle and suffered catastrophic injuries. This young man slipped into a coma and died from his injuries 15 days later.

Published on: August 27, 2015

Caitlyn Jenner May Face Criminal Charges for Los Angeles Car Wreck

by Steven M. Sweat

There have been conflicting statements that have been submitted concerning the initial factor that caused the accidental death of 69 year old Kim Howe. One theory is that Caitlyn Jenner was talking or textin on a phone prior to the incident. The fatal accident occurred in early February of this year on the Pacific Coast Highway in Los Angeles. Jenner was cited as the being the primary cause of the crash when she rear-ended Ms. Howe.

California Vehicular Manslaughter Statute

There are three types of manslaughter that an individual can be charged with in the state of California. Depending on the situation and the individuals involved, the charges executed can affect the life of the assailant for a short or long period of time. Charges are basically determined based on the intent of the crime. One major concern is whether a person actually intended to commit the alleged crime or if the incident was an accident.

Published on: August 24, 2015

Los Angeles Street Safety for Walkers and Bikers May Get Boost

by Steven M. Sweat

Los Angeles, Street Accidents, Injury Attorney

Los Angeles – California City Skyline

The Los Angeles City Council finally seems to be taking its culture into account when dealing with the laws of the road. The proposed Mobility Plan 2035 no longer treats the car as the king of the highway – city planners and other transportation professionals would now be mandated to design and construct the transportation modules with bikers and pedestrians in mind as well as people who are on public transit. The community has long been calling for a multimodal transportation plan from the city, and the cries of people who prefer to bike or walk seem to finally be heard.

If Mobility Plan 2035 goes into effect, it would completely replace the plan that Los Angeles adopted just before the turn of the millennium in 1999. That plan was more focused on cars in general, with plenty of rhetoric focused on getting cars to their destinations as fast as they could get there. However, many people have actually completely removed the car from their lives in Los Angeles. Public transit is more popular than ever. Bicycles have always been popular yet underserved. Although the city is still as stretched out as it ever was, many people are actually choosing to live without a car.

Published on: August 13, 2015

DUI Accident Results in $20M for California Family

by Steven M. Sweat

A verdict was recently reached in Los Angeles County in the case of Cardona v. Cortes. The three plaintiffs, Jose, Irene and Eduardo Cardona, were awarded $20 million for damages they collectively sustained after their vehicle was struck by a drunk driver. The trial lasted a total of 13 days, and the jury deliberated for two more before reaching a consensus on June 15, 2015.

Los Angeles Superior Court

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs in Los Angeles Superior Court on Friday, November 30, 2012, as an action resulting from a traffic collision that occurred in February 2011, with the defendant, Navarro Cortes. The Honorable John J. Kralik presided over the case.

Published on: August 5, 2015

California Electrocution Wrongful Death Verdict

by Steven M. Sweat

In a recent Riverside County case, a jury awarded the estate of a migrant farm worker $4.7 million in damages for his electrocution death while working at a fruit orchard. The 31-year-old man was working as a fruit harvester at the time of his death. He had been provided with a ladder by his employer that he was using to gather fruit from upper branches when it came in contact with a low-hanging power line, electrocuting him.

The Lawsuit

The lawsuit was filed by the decedent’s estate, the man’s wife and two children as well as a coworker against several defendants, including the site’s supervising company, S&R Farm Labor Contractor, Inc.; the Southern California Edison Company, or SCE, and the property’s owner, Circle K-5 Citrus Ranch/Kelley Trust. Reportedly, the jury took one day to deliberate before coming back with their decision following the five-week trial. In apportioning damages, the jury determined that SCE was 80 percent responsible, the man’s employer was 15 percent responsible and the site’s supervising company was 5 percent responsible. The jury did not hold the property’s owner responsible for any of the damages.