Los Angeles Personal Injury Attorney Blog

Published on: May 14, 2021

Woman Hit by Car At Fault for Jaywalking According the California Court

In some situations, California property owners may be liable for injuries that happen to people located off of their property. However, that is not always the case. In Issakhani v. Shadow Glen Homeowners Association, Inc., Cal. Ct. App. Case No. B301746, the California Court of Appeal considered whether a condominium complex owed a duty of care to a plaintiff who jaywalked across a busy street to reach the complex to visit her friend because the complex did not have enough marked visitor spaces.[1]

Factual and procedural background

Anaeis Issakhani went to visit a friend who lived at the Shadow Glen condominium complex in Los Angeles on the night of June 10, 2014, after dark. When she arrived, she did not see any available visitor parking space in the complex’s lot, so she parked her vehicle across a five-lane street in front of the complex. When she crossed the street, she failed to walk a few hundred feet to a marked crosswalk and instead jaywalked. A car struck her, causing her to suffer multiple fractures and a traumatic brain injury. Issakhani filed a lawsuit against the Shadow Glen condominium complex with negligence and premises liability causes of action. She alleged that the company was negligent by failing to install enough visitor spaces in the complex’s parking lot in violation of a municipal ordinance.

Published on: April 8, 2021

Amazon Delivery Worker Injury Attorney Los Angeles

by Steven M. Sweat

In 2019, Amazon.com Inc. surpassed Walmart Inc. to become the world’s largest retailer. During the fiscal year 2020, the behemoth grossed more than $386 billion in sales. A driver of the company’s success is how it simplifies online purchases by streamlining delivery logistics. Amazon’s customers return again and again because of their easy access to countless products and fast delivery services.

Based in Seattle, Washington, Amazon has warehouses stationed throughout the U.S. and the world. The company uses multiple carriers to transport and deliver packages to its customers. Amazon has multiple distribution centers throughout California with more centers planned. In cities throughout the state, local delivery companies are contracted to pick up and deliver goods to people at commercial and residential addresses. By using third-party delivery companies, Amazon has been able to offer fast turnaround times on its customers’ orders.

The Amazon Flex delivery program also allows independent drivers in the greater Los Angeles area and other cities across California to pick up and deliver Amazon Prime orders to customers. Each driver must wear uniforms, use on-road technology, complete safety training courses, and follow other company policies. However, drivers who drive through the Flex program are independent contractors instead of employees, so they do not receive benefits.

Published on: March 29, 2021

California Homeowner Liable for Injuries Caused by Loaded Firearm

by Steven M. Sweat

accidental-shooting-accident-attorneys-Los-Angeles

Accidental shootings because of improperly stored guns are a major problem in California and the U.S. When another person is visiting a home with guns that are not properly stored, a person who suffers a gun injury because of the negligence of the homeowner in failing to secure the guns may have grounds to recover compensation for his or her resulting losses. While homeowners have a duty of care to take reasonable steps to prevent visitors from being injured, there is a question of whether a third party who has some degree of control over the premises might also be liable for injuries resulting from the third party’s negligence. In Hernandez v. Jensen, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. 294449, the California Court of Appeals considered a case in which an adult daughter failed to make sure her father’s guns were properly stored and secured to determine whether she could be held liable when a home health aide was accidentally shot by a falling, loaded rifle in a closet.[1]

Factual and procedural background

Maria Jensen hired two health care aides to care for her 87-year-old parents in their home in Commerce, California from Gerinet, Inc. Ms. Jensen’s elderly mother had dementia, and her father was no longer able to care for her. When Jensen signed a contract for home health aides with Gerinet, the contract stated that she agreed to provide a safe home for the aides to work in. While the first aide was hired to provide direct health care assistance to her mother, the second aide was hired to provide basic health care assistance, prepare meals for Jensen’s parents, and perform light housekeeping work. Jensen also paid to install surveillance cameras in her parents’ home because of recent break-ins in the area. Jensen used the cameras to monitor the aides’ work and to check in on her parents.

Published on: March 16, 2021

Will Car Accidents Increase as Covid-19 Restrictions are Lifted in Los Angeles?

by Steven M. Sweat

When the lockdown orders were first issued in California in March 2020, there was a sharp decline in the number of traffic accidents because of the decrease in traffic. Following Mayor Garcetti’s shutdown orders in March, traffic accidents declined by 41% during that month from the number of accidents in 2019 with 2,917 reported.[1] However, once the stay-at-home order was lifted, traffic fatalities increased sharply.

Between March and July of 2020, the roads were nearly empty, resulting in fewer accidents. However, 2,983 accidents happened in August, which was almost 800 more than occurred in July. During the first nine months of 2020, the Los Angeles Police Department reported that accidents fell by 42% as compared to 2019. While that might seem like good news, the fact that fewer cars were traveling on the roads adds nuance to the numbers. Now that the state has eased some of its coronavirus restrictions, more accidents are likelier to occur.

Higher fatality rate seen with less traffic during the pandemic

Published on: February 17, 2021

Identifying Fake Reviews for Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyers

by Steven M. Sweat

fake-business-reviews-injury-attorneys-Los-Angeles

Trying to find a reputable personal injury attorney in Los Angeles can seem overwhelming. You might notice there are a large number of solo practitioners and law firms advertising their services as personal injury attorneys. You might have heard that checking online reviews from past clients can be a great way to narrow down your search. Reading about others’ experiences when working with an attorney can give you a general idea of what you might expect.

However, like any other product or service advertised online, legal websites and review sites might also include fake reviews to attract customers. This is especially troublesome when hiring an attorney because posting of fake reviews is actually a violation of the ethical rules governing lawyers in California (California Rule of Professional Conduct 4-100 prohibits untrue statements in advertisements) and is a clear sign that you may be hiring a dishonest and unethical injury lawyer. Knowing what to look for to help you identify law firms that publish fake reviews can help you to find an attorney and firm that you can trust. A good personal injury law firm will never post fake reviews to try to drive business. Here are some telltale signs that a Los Angeles personal injury law firm might be relying on fake reviews to sell their services.

1. Reviews that are generic

Published on: January 29, 2021

California Highway Fatality Verdict Remanded on Apportionment of Fault Issue

by Steven M. Sweat

In some California personal injury accidents, multiple parties may share fault. When several parties are at fault for an accident, each party’s percentage of the fault must be determined. All parties that are found to share fault will then be responsible for paying the percentages allocated to them. An individual defendant will not have to pay more than the percentage of fault that he or she has. In Plascencia v. Deese, Cal. Ct. App. 2d Crim. No. B299142, the appeals court considered a case in which the court excluded evidence of the comparative fault of several defendants who had settled before trial so that the jury could not consider their comparative fault when it apportioned an award of damages in the plaintiffs’ favor.[1]

Factual and procedural background

Jocelyn Plascencia was a 20-year-old woman who was driving on SR-126 on April 19, 2014. A woman named Anita Newcomb was leaving a fruit stand that was located on the highway’s south side. She made an illegal U-turn to enter SR-126 in Plascencia’s path. Plascencia was driving a Toyota Camry. She swerved to avoid colliding with Newcomb’s vehicle, lost control of her car, and crashed into the rear of a tractor-trailer truck that had been parked on the south side of the highway close to the fruit stand by a man named Charles Deese.

Published on: January 15, 2021

Man Injured on Side of the Road Allowed to Continue Lawsuit Against AAA

by Steven M. Sweat

After an injury accident in California, a victim may be entitled to recover damages from every party that contributed to the accident’s cause. In some cases, several parties may share liability. If a plaintiff cannot prove one of the elements of a cause of action, the trial court can grant a defendant’s summary judgment motion and dismiss the case. In Luebke v. Automobile Club of Southern California, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. B302782, the appeals court considered a case in which the trial court granted a summary judgment motion based on the plaintiff’s admission in an interrogatory.[1]

Factual and procedural background

On June 4, 2015, Brett Luebke was driving his car on northbound Interstate 405 when his vehicle’s engine died. He coasted onto the shoulder and called the Automobile Club of Southern California to ask for roadside assistance. Luebke remained sitting inside of his vehicle for two hours as he waited for a tow truck to arrive. While he was still there, an unlicensed driver named Tong Yin lost control of his car and ran off the road, striking Luebke’s vehicle in its rear.

Published on: November 17, 2020

What disqualifies you from driving for Lyft in California?

by Steven M. Sweat

Many Californians rely on the gig economy to supplement their incomes, and some people earn all of their income through driving for ride-share companies. To drive for Lyft, drivers must meet a number of different requirements. Many potential Lyft drivers are disqualified because they cannot meet the minimum standards. While it is good that Lyft has basic requirements that its drivers must meet, some Lyft drivers are still unsafe. Each year, a number of Lyft drivers are involved in motor vehicle accidents. If you suffer injuries in an accident caused by a negligent Lyft driver, you may be entitled to recover damages for your losses. An experienced Lyft accident attorney at the Steven M. Sweat Personal Injury Lawyers might help you to recover compensation for your losses. Here is some information about the requirements for drivers who want to drive for Lyft.

License and age requirements

To drive for Lyft, you must be at least the minimum age for the area in which you live. The minimum age to drive for Lyft varies from state to state. Some cities also have different minimum age requirements. In general, Lyft drivers in California must be a minimum of 25 years old. Several cities and counties have a lower minimum age of 21 for Lyft drivers, however. You can search your city to see the minimum age requirement on Lyft’s website.

Published on: October 28, 2020

Los Angeles Slow Streets Program Aims to Improve Traffic Safety

by Steven M. Sweat

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the City of Los Angeles implemented the Slow Streets program in May 2020.[1] This program allowed more people to get fresh air and enjoy their neighborhoods while large portions of the city were shut down in response to the spread of the virus. While people were under stay-at-home orders, the Slow Streets program allowed them to have more room to exercise outdoors. The program proved to be popular with residents of many neighborhoods throughout the city, prompting the City Council to consider implementing it as a permanent option instead of a temporary measure. In addition to drawing more people outdoors to enjoy their neighborhoods, the Slow Streets program may also help to reduce the number of traffic injuries and fatalities caused by vehicles speeding through neighborhoods.

What is the Slow Streets program?

With many people ordered to stay at home during the pandemic, Los Angeles implemented a temporary measure to allow people to exercise outdoors in their neighborhoods called the Slow Streets program. This program allowed neighborhoods with sponsoring organizations to apply to have their areas designated for slow streets. Neighborhoods that have been approved for the program are blocked off with signs that prohibit cutting through and only allow local traffic. The signs also call for drivers to slow down and safely share the roads. After the program was implemented, a few hundred neighborhoods submitted applications. The program allows people who live in affected neighborhoods to enjoy cycling, jogging, and walking in a safer environment free from speeding cars.[2]

Published on: October 12, 2020

Los Angeles Parking Lot Accident Not the Fault of the Adjacent Business

by Steven M. Sweat

Property owners and occupiers in Los Angeles have a duty to maintain their premises in reasonably safe conditions to protect lawful visitors from being injured. This duty can sometimes extend to the adjacent, publicly-owned property when the property owner has exercised control over it in some way and has created or contributed to the dangerous condition. In Lopez v. City of Los Angeles, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. B288396, the appeals court considered a case in which it was unclear whether a property owner had exerted control over a portion of a city-owned sidewalk that abutted against its driveway and caused the plaintiff to suffer serious injuries.[1]

Factual and procedural background

Jose Luis Lopez, Jr. was walking in the rain in Feb. 2014. When he came to the driveway leading to Wally’s Wine & Spirits, Lopez stepped in a pothole that was filled with rainwater. This caused his ankle to dislocate, and he tore three ligaments and broke two bones. Wally’s Wine & Spirits leases the facility to store wine for restaurants and a liquor store. Traffic in the parking lot is limited to delivery vans and vehicles of customers who pay to store wine in a temperature-controlled room. The property is managed by the Northern Trust Bank of California and is owned by the Marvin A. Kahn Deceased Trust.