Government liability for injury
Govt Code 835 states that a public entity is liable for injury caused by a dangerous condition of its property if that danger existed at the time of injury, the injury was caused by the danger, was foreseeable, and the entity had notice in time to fix the danger. A “dangerous condition” is defined vaguely as…
Employee or Independent?
A recent CA appellate decision discusses the distinction between an employee and an independent contractor for purposes of imposing vicarious liability on a “deep pocket” in an injury case. In Bowman v. Tommie Wyatt,Jr., the court reversed a substantial judgment against the City of Los Angeles, finding the trial court erred in giving CACI 3704, stating…
UM Claims for Minors
CA Civil Codes provide that minors injured under the age of 18 have until their 20th birthday to file personal injury claims. CA Insurance Codes dealing with UM claims require that a claim filed against one’s own insurer for uninsured motorist benefits be presented within 2 years of the date of injury either by (1) filing suit…
Red light tickets
An appellate court in Orange County has dismissed red-light tickets based on interesection cameras without proper foundation (a police officer or business agent) on the basis that standing alone, the photos are inadmissable hearsay.People v. Khaled, May 25, 2010. A further appeal of this decision is probable.
Government Claims limitations extended for disability
The strict requirement for filing an injury claim against a government entity within 6 months may be extended if the plaintiff was under a severe disability during the first 6 months under Barragan v. County of LA
Government Statute of Limitations
Claims against a governmental entity for injuries present their own issues with respect to traditional injury statute of limitations, which are now two years for most CA injuries. If the injury claim is against a governmental entity, a notice of that claim MUST be filed with the government within 6 months of the acrrual of…
Employer liability for assault
Recent Orange County appellate case affirms that employer MAY be liable for criminal assaults of employee while on duty under agency theory. Defendant employer was granted summary judgment after employee in retail store attacked customer who allegedly bad-mouthed his employment skills while seeking help with a product. Appeals court overturned judgment for employer, stating it…
Waving left turns through
A recent appellate court decision (Gilmer v. Ellington, 2008) affirms that drivers who are stopped in a through traffic lane and wave a left-turning motorist to cross in front of them have no liability to the injured driver hit in the next lane over by the left-turning driver! Wave them into oncoming traffic with no liability – so…
Canon shot t-shirts
A recent court decision ( Mcgarry v. Sax, 2008) held that spectators injured by “product tosses” at ball games assume the risk of such injuries. If you’re at one of these events, and the crowd mobs you for the product shot in your direction, don’t look to the owners to compensate you for your fractures.
Releases and Waivers
Signed liability releases by “recreational” particpants in advance of their injuries are now widely upheld in CA. Even where the “recreation” was an aerial flight in a sightseeing plane, and a “common carrier” standard of care was asserted, a CA appellate court (Booth v. Santa Barbara Biplanes, LLC, 2008) upheld a signed release/waiver by the…