Killed in accident 552
April 16th, 2012 
admin Wrongful death is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Moody v. Bedford 202 Cal.App.4th 745 (2/5) Mrs. Hood killed by Bedford in accident. Hood’s daughter, Brown, claimed she was only heir and accepted Bedford’s policy limits offer. Hood’s other children then sued for wrongful death. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Bedford’s MSJ granted, reversed. [1] One-action rule precluding multiple wrongful death actions not applicable to a prelitigation settlement, for it is not an action. If Bedford wanted protection of one-action rule, he should have demanded Brown file lawsuit, and then settled case. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Glass insurance 551
April 16th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
American States Ins. Co. v. National Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford 202 Cal.App.4th 692 (2012) (4/1) AS and NF insured Glass for different periods. In underlying action, Glass settled case, Apr 2007. AS sued NF filing to pay for Glass’s defense and settlement, May 2009. Demurrer sustained, affirmed. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer [1] Equitable contribution claims governed by CCP § 339(1), two years, triggered no later than settling Glass’s case. [2] AS’s claim is for equitable contribution not subrogation. Subrogation is action against party primarily responsible for the loss. Contribution action is against co-obligor who shares in liability. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Sergent sexual harassment 550
April 16th, 2012 admin Sexual harassment is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Joaquin v City of Los Angeles 202 Cal.App.4th 1207 (2012) (2/4) LAPD officer Joaquin claimed his sergeant sexually harassed him. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer LAPD denied claim and brought false complaint charge against Joaquin, stopped his promotion, and following hearing, fired him. Joaquin sued for harassment and FEHA retaliation. Verdict $2M, reversed. [1] No substantial evidence to support “retaliatory intent” element of retaliation claim. City cannot retaliate but may terminate Joaquin for conduct warranting it and existing apart from harassment investigation. Since evidence supporting retaliation not presented to independent review board that found termination, no substantial evidence supports intent element. [2] CACI 2505 on retaliation disapproved, in theat it omits retaliatory intent element. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Reyes v Macy’s, Inc. lawsuit 549
April 16th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Reyes v Macy’s, Inc. 202 Cal.App.4th 1119 (2012) (1/3) Reyes brought class action for wage-and-hour and PAGA (Private Attorney General Act LabC § 2698) class claim and FEHA individual claims. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Trial court severed class claims and stayed them, ordered FEHA to arbitration, and denied dismissal motions on class claims. Macy’s appealed, Reyes’s motion to dismiss appeal granted. [1] Denial of motin to dismiss is not appealable, even if it keeps alive a claim which conceivably could have been treated as an arbitrable claim. [2] Granting arbitration motion is also not appealable, only a denial is. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Molested by priest 548
April 16th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Santillan v Roman Catholic Bishop of Fresno 202 Cal.App.4th 708 (2012) (2/8) GS & HS molested by priest H 1959-65 and 1960-73 respectively. One-year revival period (2003) applies only if diocese knew or should have known of H’s molesting during relevant period. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Jury instruction that innocuous or ambiguous conduct is insufficient to give diocese knowledge. Jury found action barred by statute of limitations. New trial granted for HS, denied for GS, for new evidence that other boy made report in 1967, affirmed. [1] New evidence learned during jury deliberations, not reported to trial judge until after verdict, proper to find timely. [2] Because 1967 report relevant only to HS’s claim, not to GS’s which ended two years before report. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Bond company liability 547
April 16th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Rossa v. D.L. Falk Construction, Inc. 53 Cal.4th 387 (2012) Cantil-Sakauye 7-0 Falk appealed judgment and posted bond as security on appeal. Bonding company required a standby letter of credit to secure bond, and Falk had to borrow money to obtain letter. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Judgment reversed and Falk sought bond-related costs, including interest and other borrowing costs (>$100K). Rule of Court 8.278 allows “cost to procure a surety bond, including the premium and the cost to obtain a letter of credit as collateral.” Motion to tax costs granted, affirmed. [1] Rules governing costs are strictly construed. [2] A loan is a means to acquire assets to satisfy the judgment, while a bond and a letter of credit are a means to verify that assets are available to pay the judgment. Prevailing party entitled to costs of latter, not former. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Asbestos exposure to sold materials 546
April 16th, 2012 admin Product liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
O’Neil v. Crane Co. 53 Cal.4th 335 (2012) Corrigan 7-0 Asbestos exposure to materials sold to other manufacturers who added asbestos to their own products which O’Neil encountered during his service in the US Navy. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Defendants never manufactured or sold any of the asbestos-containing materials O’Neil encountered. Nonsuit, granted, affirmed. [1] Strict liability applies to defects in one’s own product. To hold liability “would represent an unprecedented expansion of strict products liability.” No duty to prevent injuries caused by a defect in others’ products foreseeably used with a defendant’s product. [2] No duty to warn about potential hazards in others’ replacement parts where dangerous feature not integral to the product’s design. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Mutual for employment-related entitlements 545
April 16th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Arnold v Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. 202 Cal.App.4th 580 (2011) (1/1) Arnold was nonexclusive insurance agent for Mutual. She terminated her contract and sued Mutual for employment-related entitlements (business costs, etc.). San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer MSJ that Arnold was an independent contractor, not an employee, granted, affirmed. [1] LabC § 2750 does not alter common law definition of employee. [2] No material issue of fact that she was an independent contractor. Arnold decided what and when to sell to whom and how much time to spend doing so, and could choose to sell Mutual’s or other products. No performance evaluations, monitoring or supervision of her work, etc. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Police chief liability 544
April 16th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Robinson v City of Chowchilla 202 Cal.App.4th 382 (2011) (5) Police chief Robinson fired in violation of GovC § 3304(c). San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer Robinson sued and prevailed (202 CA4th 368), and then moved for CCP § 1021.5 attorney’s fee, denied, reversed. [1] Robinson’s lawsuit enforced important right affecting the public interest, benefiting both the general public and a large class of persons (1,400 police chiefs in Calif). Remand to determine whether Robinson’s private pecuniary interests outweighed his financial burden. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Defective computer chip sellers 543
April 16th, 2012 admin Premises liability is another area of San-Diego-Personal-Injury-attorney.com
Collins v eMachines, Inc. 202 Cal.App.4th 249 (2011) (3) Buyers’ class action against sellers for defective computer chip under Consumer Legal Remedies Act CC § 1750, common law, and B&PC § 17200. Judgment on pleadings granted, reversed. San-Diego-Auto-Accident-lawyer [1] Concealment or suppression of material facts violates CLRA. Claim stated when defendant has exclusive knowledge of material fact not reasonably accessible to plaintiff or where defendant actively conceals, both of which alleged in proposed amended complaint which alleged a computer-manufacturing defect. [2] Claim also stated for common law fraud and § 17200 under the fraud prong. [3] Unjust enrichment restitution claim fails in that equitable relief properly denied, as adequate remedies at law exist. San Diego personal injury attorney
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off