Garden Grove Police Officer Crashed Cruiser While Transporting Suspect

A Garden Grove police officer crashed his cruiser early this morning while transporting a suspect back to the station,  According to KNBC News, the officer somehow crashed his vehicle into a parked semi-trailer.  The incident happened at the intersection of Acacia Street and Nelson Street around 12:00 a.m.  The officer sustained minor head injuries, but there is apparently no word on how badly, if at all, the suspect being transported was injured.

Fault for this Orange County Accident

Absent the suspect somehow causing the accident, which would seem unlikely, the liability for this Orange County accident would likely rest with the City of Garden Grove. In general, a police officer must use reasonable care when transporting a suspect, and striking a parked semi-trailer would seem to suggest such care was not being exercised. However, there could be a number of explanations for the happening of the accident, such as a mechanical failure or even illegal parking of the semi. 

• Public Entity Liability For Auto Accidents

Under California law, a public entity (such as the City of Garden Grove) is usually liable for injuries caused by negligent acts or omissions in the operation of any motor vehicle by an employee of the public entity, acting within the scope of his or her employment.  This is true even if the vehicle is an emergency vehicle and lights and sirens are being used.  The public entity in an emergency situation may still be held liable if there if their employee drives in such a way so as to expose others to an "unreasonable risk of harm."

If you or a family member has been injured because of the neglect of a public entity employee, such as a police officer or fire department employee, contacting an experienced Orange County auto accident attorney is perhaps the best way to find out about your rights to compensation for any injuries or damages suffered.  

Elderly Man Killed in Riverside Bike Accident

Riverside Bicycle Accident

This afternoon a 68-year-old man on a bicycle was struck and fatally injured on Central Avenue in Riverside.  According to news reports, the man was traveling east on Central near the Olivewood Cemetery when the accident occurred.  The vehicle striking the cyclist was traveling the same direction at the time of the impact.  For some reason, the victim may have swerved into the left travel lane just before the collision occurred.

The Cause of the Accident

According to the news report, the bicyclist was traveling in the left lane when he was hit by a car also heading east on Central.  It is unknown why the rider was not closer to the right hand curb.  In general, bicyclist should ride their bikes on the right hand side of the road, but there are a number of exceptions.  It is unknown whether the victim in this Riverside accident had a good reason for traveling in the left lane, but that determination will affect whether the driver may be held liable for the accident.  Additionally, since this was a daytime accident, it will be important to look at the sight-distance variables to determine whether the driver should have been able to see the rider in time to avoid an impact.  If the driver could see the bike rider for more than about 1 1/2 seconds prior to the collision, the driver may well be at least partially, if not entirely, responsible for this fatal accident.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a bicycle accident, contacting an experienced injury attorney may be the best way to determine whether you are entitled to compensation for any injuries or damages suffered.

Left Turn Accident In Garden Grove - Car Crashes into Restaurant

A left turn crash in Garden Grove resulted in a car careening into a restaurant, sending three to the hospital. According to the KTLA news report, the collision happened at about 2:45 p.m. yesterday afternoon near the intersection of Garden Grove Boulevard and Yockey Street.  The accident occurred when a woman turning left collided with another vehicle with two men inside.  The 73-year-old woman may have panicked after the initial collision, causing her to drive her Mercedes into the window of the Pho 86 restaurant. Inside the business a 37-year-old mother and her 10-year-old daughter were struck and injured.

Left Turn Accidents and Fault

In California, the Vehicle Code (Section 21801(a)) requires that any left turn be made only after the driver has yielded "the right-of-way to all vehicles approaching from the opposite direction which are close enough to constitute a hazard at any time during the turning movement, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to the approaching vehicles until the left turn or U-turn can be made with reasonable safety."  It is unknown whether the woman in the Mercedes violated this section, but this is the statute against which her driving will be measured.  The Garden Grove Police Department will have to determine the cause of the impact in the intersection and whether the Mercedes driver was careless in allowing her vehicle to collide into the Pho 86.

After an Accident

The fault for an accident may be a difficult and complex thing to figure out.  An Orange County injury attorney who has handled dozens of such cases is likely in the best position to help you protect your rights.  

Paid Forward at Just The Right Time

Last night at a McDonalds in Orange County (Yorba Linda) I was in line to get dinner for the family, it was "Fast Food Thursday". When I arrived at the first window the cashier told me the woman in the car ahead had paid $10.00 toward my meal. I couldn't believe it...NEVER happened before.  My mother, on the phone with me, likewise had her breath taken away by the gesture...which I could hear in her voice.

It was dark and I couldn't see who it was initially, but when I caught up to them on YL Boulevard, I noticed it was a grey-haired woman, behind the wheel of an older Toyota Rav 4...alone.  She didn't look at me as I passed by and apparently didn't want any thanks...just a kind heart helping someone she didn't even know....Happy Holidays.

What Proposition 46's Failure Means

#Proposition46 did not pass, and now it's back to the unfair treatment of medical malpractice victims and their families. Unfortunately, the medical malpractice insurers spent an overwhelming amount of money on false and misleading advertising that worked to dupe the California voters.

For now, the $250,000.00 limit on pain and suffering (general) damages will remain and many malpractice cases simply cannot be cost-effectively pursued.  A complex malpractice case can require multiple expert witnesses, each costing thousands of dollars for the services they provide before trial.  At least for the foreseeable future, many malpractice victims and their families will have a difficult time finding an experienced lawyer willing to take on their case.  Consequently, many careless doctors will not have to own up to their responsibility, and they will continue to practice at an unacceptably low level.

Aside from the damages cap, unlike other service providers whose performance can effect lives, physicians do not have to undergo drug and alcohol testing.  Logically, how can it be justified to test truck drivers (who can cause an accident while impaired) and not doctors, whose errors are already the third leading cause of death in this country?

Doctor Accountability - Proposition 46

Proposition 46 is a Must

The status quo in California simply will not do for another 38 years.  Careless and even impaired doctors are not being held accountable, and this needs to end for the benefit of all who receive health care in this State.  The California Medical Board is so ineffective that they have been threatened with dissolution by the State legislature.  It is up to the victims of malpractice and their families to ensure accountability for the doctors who have made so many suffer.  Medical errors are the number three cause of death in this country!

Don't be fooled by an overwhelming and misleading ad campaign by the malpractice insurance industry. No amount of advertising rhetoric can change the fact that California has a 38-year-old law on the books that unfairly protects negligent doctors from being held accountable. #VOTEYESON46 

Improve the Quality of Health Care in California - Vote Yes on Proposition 46

Why Vote Yes on Proposition 46?

What does a no vote on Proposition 46 truly mean? Years more of malpractice victims being deprived of fair compensation. Don't fall for the malpractice insurance industry's lies. A YES VOTE on Proposition 46 will accomplish it's intended purpose...a better quality of health care for everyone!

Malpractice limits in California have remained the same for more than 38 years. There has been no adjustment for the cost of living/inflation and no increase to keep California more in line with other States. Is it any wonder the quality of health care in this State has diminished over that same period of time? The malpractice insurance industry has garnered way too much voter support in the past with lies about malpractice lawsuits and jury verdicts. It is time to shift the tide back to the patients and victims of careless doctors.

The current damages cap on malpractice cases in this State is just $250,000.00, regardless of whether a negligent doctor disables or kills their patient.  Malpractice insurance companies would love nothing more than to keep it that way and pad their profits for the next 38 years.  Say no to this horribly unfair, antiquated law and VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 46.
‪#‎VOTEYESON46‬
https://www.yeson46.org/yes-on-46-tv/