Saturday, August 31, 2013

Single-Vehicle Crash in Orange Leaves One Dead


A young woman was killed early this morning in a fiery, single-vehicle accident in Orange.  According to KABC News, the accident occurred on eastbound Katella Aveneue just before 4:00 a.m.  The 26-year-old from Anaheim apparently lost control of her vehicle in a curve and struck a sign before her car burst into flames.  Despite rescue efforts, the victim was taken to a local hospital in critical condition where she later succumbed to her injuries.  The precise cause of this tragic accident is still under investigation.

Cause of the Crash

Whenever there is a solo vehicle accident the question about driver impairment arises.  The accident above happened at a time of the day known for a high percentage of drunk driving accidents.  Beyond this, there is the question of vehicle speed and whether the loss of control was due to excessive speed through the curve.  Even where the accident appears to be related to driver impairment or error, issues of "crashworthiness" of the vehicle and the condition of the roadway arise.  For example, was this an accident that should have caused a fire?  Was there something about the gas tank configuration that caused this vehicle to burst into flames?  As far as the roadway is concerned, is this an area where similar accident have happened in the past?  Was there a defect in the roadway (pothole, slippery asphalt, etc.) that caused the driver to lose control?  To fully investigate this accident all of these questions should be answered.  

If you have been injured or a loved one has been killed in an auto accident involving a defective vehicle or a dangerous roadway, contacting an experienced personal injury attorney can be the most important step toward obtaining a clear understanding of your right to compensation.

SOURCE:  Anaheim woman killed in fiery crash in Orange, KABC News, Orange County, August 31, 2013

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Loss Prevention Misconduct - Your Rights

Store Loss Prevention agents and their employers can be held civilly liable for misconduct when their actions lead to an unlawful detention or arrest.  It is not uncommon for store security (Loss Prevention) agents to apprehend a suspected shoplifter only to learn the person they detained did not commit any crime.  When that occurs, the victim may have a valid claim for damages against the agents and their employer.  There are several issues, however, that determine whether such a claim has merit.

The Merchant's Privilege

Under California law, a store or their agent may detain someone for a reasonable length of time to conduct an investigation in a reasonable manner whenever there is "probable cause" to believe the person detained has stolen or is attempting to steal store property.  This law, found in Penal Code Section 490.5, is known as the "merchant's privilege", and it is a complete defense to a claim when there is probable cause to believe a theft or an attempted theft occurred.  The real issue is whether the store can prove it was more likely than not the crime occurred.  Typically, the store will have video surveillance of what they claim is suspicious activity.  Quite often, however, the claim of having video evidence is a bluff, used to get the person detained to confess to their crime.  It is not uncommon to find in suits arising in this context the video actually shows either nothing suspicious or it may even prove the person detained did nothing wrong at all.

The Remedies Available

Assuming probable cause cannot be established by way of testimony or video, then the next issue is one of damages.  If someone is taken into "custody" by LP agents but released quickly and before any law enforcement is involved, the value of such a claim would be relatively modest, although still worthy of being pursued.  In contrast, where security contacts police and moves forward with a criminal prosecution, the victim of the unlawful arrest and prosecution may have a number of valuable remedies available.  For example, the claims typically made against the retailer include false imprisonment, malicious prosecution (if there is a trial won by the person accused), negligence, assault and battery (if any force was used by the LP agent(s)) and possibly a claim under California's Bane Civil Rights Act.

If you or a loved one has been falsely detained and accused of theft, you may be entitled to compensation for the humiliation of being apprehended and prosecuted.  Consultation with an experienced injury attorney is perhaps the best way to find out more about your right to compensation.

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Orange County Hit-and-Run Takes Life of Elderly Pedestrian

An elderly pedestrian was struck and killed by a hit-and-run driver early Tuesday morning on Euclid Street in Santa Ana.  According to KABC News, the accident happened just after 5:00 a.m. in the 500 block of Euclid when the 85-year-old victim, Joseph Rudolph, was jaywalking.  The driver, Michael Truong Pham of Garden Grove, hit Rudolph with his SUV and carried him with his vehicle for about 30 yards.  Pham later called police and told them what had happened.  Because he left the scene in the first place, he was taken into custody on suspicion of felony hit-and-run.

The Area and Cause of the Accident

The area of the accident is a relatively straight and flat stretch of roadway, without very many streetlights on the east side of the street. It is unknown where the point of impact occurred, but it would appear from the news story that Rudolph was outside of either a marked or unmarked crosswalk.  According to the U.S. Naval Observatory, the sunrise time for Tuesday (August 27th) was at 5:22 a.m., so it was likely dark outside at the time of the accident.  However, in general headlights should illuminate the roadway far enough ahead to allow a driver to take evasive action if a pedestrian is crossing a road and could not otherwise have been seen.  This depends on the precise area of the impact and how far into the roadway Rudolph was when he was struck.

Wrongful Death Claims

In an accident in which a negligent driver causes or contributes to the happening of an accident, the surviving family members may have the right to pursue a wrongful death claim under California law.  In the case above, the Rudolph family may be able to recover compensation for the loss of their loved one.  The amount that can be recovered by the family is reduced by the amount of negligence of the decedent, which makes sense and seems fair.  For example, if a jury determined that Rudolph was 50% responsible for this accident, the family has the right to be compensated for only that part of the damages (50%) caused by the driver.

If you have been injured or a family member has been killed in a hit-and-run accident, consultation with an experienced injury attorney is perhaps the best way to find out about your rights.

SOURCE:  Santa Ana hit-and-run: 85-year-old pedestrian killed, suspect arrested, KABC News, Orange County News, August 27, 2013, by Q McCray.

Saturday, August 24, 2013

Orange Accident on 5 Freeway Leaves One Dead


While waiting for a flat tire to be fixed on the 5 freeway in the City of Orange, a 54-year-old man was struck and killed Thursday night.  According to a report by KABC News, the victim was sitting on the bumper of a Toyota Sequoia while one of the passengers changed the flat tire when the accident occurred.  The driver of the Toyota had pulled over at the State College Boulevard exit to the northbound 5 freeway and stopped at about 9:30 p.m., well before a green Lexus traveling at about 60-65 miles per hour struck the rear of the Toyota.  The deceased was pinned under the Lexus, and he died at the scene.  The passenger who was changing the tire sustained major injuries and two other passengers who remained inside the SUV suffered minor injuries.  The driver of the Lexus sustained moderate injuries, and all of those hurt in the accident were transported to local, Orange County hospitals.  The crash does not appear to have been related to driving under the influence, and the precise cause of the crash remains under investigation.  

Cause of the Crash and Driver Inattention

Tragic accidents like the one above are often caused by driver inattention and are completely avoidable.  However, it is very important in such cases to reconstruct the accident and determine the location of the stranded vehicle (relative to the travel lanes), whether the emergency flashers were operating, and whether the moving vehicle had its headlights on.  If the Toyota Sequoia was completely out of the travel lanes and had its emergency flashers operating, it would be very difficult to understand how an attentive driver could not have seen the Toyota in sufficient time to determine it was stopped and out of the travel lanes.  The area of the accident is relatively flat and straight.  About the only "confusing" element to this area of the roadway is the striping, and at night it might appear as though the shoulder was actually a travel lane.

If you have been injured or a family member has been killed in a stalled vehicle accident, contacting an experienced Orange County car accident attorney is generally the first and most important step toward obtaining compensation for the injuries and damages suffered.

SOURCE:  I-5 crash in Orange kills 1, injures 4 others, KABC News, Orange County, August 23, 2013

Thursday, August 22, 2013

Freeway Bus Accident Injures 52 Passengers in Irwindale


This morning a charter bus coming from Monterey Park on its way to Highland overturned on the eastbound 210 freeway in Irwindale, injuring fifty-two passengers.  According to KTLA News, the crash happened when the bus driver made an unsafe lane change, clipping the back of a Hyundai Elantra.  The bus swerved and overturned near the center divider.  The bus was on its way to the San Manuel Indian Bingo and Casino in the Inland Empire at the time of the accident.  Six of the fifty-two passengers injured had to be airlifted from the crash site to area hospitals.  Several drivers stopped to assist the injured out of the bus, and about seventy-five firefighters responded to the scene.  The entire freeway was shut down for some time and was expected to remain closed until at least 5:00 p.m.

Bus Drivers Have a Heightened Responsibility

As referenced above, the CHP at least tentatively concluded the bus driver made an unsafe lane change, causing the accident.  Assuming this was the cause of the accident, then the driver's employer, apparently the Da Zhen Bus company, will have the responsibility of compensating all of the injured passengers.  A bus operator, considered a "common carrier" under the law, "must use the utmost care and diligence for their [passenger's] safe carriage, must provide everything necessary for that purpose, and must exercise to that end a reasonable degree of skill." (California Civil Code Section 2100)  Making an unsafe lane change is actually a violation of the California Vehicle Code and, if proven, amounts to negligence.  For a bus operator, a violation of a statute is strong evidence that the "utmost care" was not used.

Insurance Complications With Large Bus Accidents

Accidents like the one above, involving a large number of passengers, can create legal and logistical complications for those seeking compensation.  For example, if the insurance policy covering the operation of the Da Zhen bus has a five million dollar limit (which is not uncommon) all of the injured parties will likely have to divide that policy among themselves.  This will take careful preparation of each claimant's case and likely a very lengthy and complicated negotiation process.  It is common for cases like the one above to be resolved in mediation, a settlement process in which a mutually agreeable party (the mediator) is selected and then assists all of the claimants in resolving their claims at the same time.  Most often, insurance companies covering an accident like the one today will require a "global" settlement in which all claims are resolved at once.

If you have been injured or a loved one killed in a bus accident, consultation with an experienced bus accident attorney can be the most important step taken toward securing fair compensation for the injuries and damages sustained.

SOURCE:  Charter Bus to Casino Overturns on 210 Freeway; 52 Hurt, KTLA News, August 22, 2013, by KTLA Web Staff

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Fatal Rollover Crash on I-15 in Hesperia Caused by Tire Blowout


On Monday afternoon at about 1:50 p.m., one man was killed and another was injured when the right rear tire blew out on their van, causing the vehicle to rollover.  According to the Daily Press, the accident happened on the northbound Interstate 15 near the Main Street onramp in Hesperia.  The driver of the Chevrolet Express van, 55-year-old Pablo Salgado, was pronounced dead at the scene.  The passenger, Richard Castineyra, 25, was transported by helicopter to Loma Linda University Medical Center to be treated for lacerations.  The CHP is investigating the precise cause of the accident.

Potential Tire Defect

According to witnesses to the accident above, the rear tire of the van blew out which caused the van to veer across two travel lanes and strike the center divider.  This type of accident can be the result of a defective tire that unexpectedly failed.  Generally speaking, tires do not suddenly blow out unless they are too worn, strike an object or have some sort of defect causing the tire to come apart.  A careful analysis of the tire and scene of the accident by the CHP should allow them to pin point what caused the sudden tire separation.  At freeway speeds, once a tire suddenly deflates, the driver is going to have a tough time maintaining any control over their vehicle.  If was indeed a defective tire that caused the tire to fall apart, then the manufacture and/or seller of the tire may have liability to the injured passenger and the family of the deceased driver.

Worker's Compensation

From the photographs taken at the scene, it would appear the van may have been owned by Stanley Steemer.  It also seems like a logical inference that both Salgado and Castineyra, were in the course and scope of their employment at the time of the accident.  Assuming that to have been the case, then the Salgado family and Castineyra would have valid claims for worker's compensation benefits.  However, pain, suffering  and emotional upset are not recoverable under the worker's compensation system so a civil lawsuit would need to be pursued in order to recover those damages.

If you have been injured or a loved one killed in an accident caused by a product defect, the first step toward obtaining compensation for your injuries and damages should be to contact an experienced product liability attorney.

SOURCE:  UPDATED:  One person killed, one person injured in I-15 crash, Daily Press, August 19, 2013, by Rebecca Howes

Sunday, August 18, 2013

Studio City Hit-and-Run Proves Fatal for Pedestrian


Late Saturday night a pedestrian was killed in a hit-and-run accident in Studio City after being struck by a white Mercedes whose driver fled the scene.  According to the report by KTLA News, the incident happened when the victim was walking across Ventura Boulevard at the intersection with Fairway Avenue at approximately 11:45 p.m.  The victim, who has yet to be identified, was pronounced dead at the scene.  The white Mercedes CLS reportedly has paper plates with the word "Encino" on them.  The Los Angeles Police Department is still investigating the crime, and anyone with information is asked to the call the LAPD.  An anonymous tip can be left at 1-877-527-3247.

Location of the Accident

The intersection where the accident occurred has a marked crosswalk for pedestrians crossing Ventura Boulevard.  It is unknown whether the victim was within the crosswalk at the time, but it is certainly an area where a driver should expect to find pedestrians crossing the street.  There are a number of businesses (including restaurants and a bowling alley) in the immediate vicinity of the intersection.  Aside from these factors, this stretch of Ventura Boulevard is curved which could reduce the amount of time a driver would have to observe a pedestrian crossing the street in front of them.  With the driver fleeing the scene of the accident, it can be reasonably inferred they at least felt some responsibility for what happened.  Under California law, flight from the scene of a crime or accident can be considered as evidence of consciousness of guilt, although this is not conclusive evidence, and the jury is entitled to decide what weight should be given to the evidence.

If a loved one has been killed or you have been injured in a pedestrian accident, contacting an experienced injury attorney can be an important first step toward securing compensation for the losses, injuries and damages sustained.

SOURCE:  Search Underway for Hit-and-Run Driver in Studio City Fatality, KTLA News, August 18, 2013, by Ann Pride

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

MTA Bus Collides With and Kills Pedestrian and Dog

A horrific bus accident occurred today taking the life of a pedestrian and his dog.  According to KABC News, the accident happened in the 8100 Block of Webb Avenue in Sun Valley when an MTA bus struck the pedestrian and his dog at about 11:00 a.m.  An MTA representative has indicated the victim was walking his dog when it got loose and ran into the street.  The accident happened when the man ran into the street after his dog.  The accident is under investigation.

Scene of The Accident

The tragic collision above occurred along a stretch of Webb Avenue that is flat, straight and with no obstructions.  Looking at the aerial photograph provided by KABC News, it appears the victim and his dog were hit in the number one lane very near the Cristo Es La Roca church.  Assuming the photograph documents the point of rest of the bus, it appears the MTA bus traveled in the number one lane for some distance after the impact.  It is unknown what speed the bus was traveling just prior to the accident, and it is not readily apparent what the speed limit is at the scene, although there is a 35 mph limit posted some distance away.

Reconstruction Issues

Anytime a moving vehicle strikes a pedestrian, issues of speed and perception-reaction time are considered.  When a vehicle is traveling at 35 mph, this translates to about 52 feet per second.  Since the generally accepted perception-reaction time is about 1.5 seconds, if the potential collision can be anticipated from a distance of greater than 78 feet then it could be avoided.  In other words, if the bus driver could have seen the pedestrian in the road when the bus was roughly 80 feet away from the point of impact, the accident could likely have been avoided by an attentive driver.  These reconstruction issues are the same law enforcement generally considers, or should consider, when determining fault for an accident.

If you or a loved one has been involved in a pedestrian accident, contacting a personal injury attorney is a good first toward obtaining compensation for the injuries and damages sustained.

SOURCE:  MTA bus kills pedestrian, dog in Sun Valley, KABC News, Los Angeles News, August 14, 2013

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Crenshaw District Hit-and-Run Leaves Pedestrian Fatally Injured

A hit-and-run crash in the Crenshaw District of Los Angeles on Monday has left a 37-year-old man dead.  According to ABC News, the accident happened at about 1:00 a.m. when the victim was crossing West Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard at its intersection with Nicolet Avenue.  The victim was within the crosswalk and was apparently heading across the street in order to reach his own car when the collision occurred.  The suspect was driving a 1999-2002 Land Rover Discovery, champagne in color.  Local residents describe this area as notorious for speeders.  Anyone who has information regarding this accident has been asked to contact the LAPD's South Traffic Division at (323) 421-2577.

Crosswalk Dangers

Sadly, accidents like the one above happen with alarming frequency.  Drivers who are impaired or distracted do not pay attention to the presence of an intersection or even a painted crosswalk.  In the case above, the victim was crossing the street within a marked crosswalk.  In fact, the intersection where the accident occurred is very well marked with pedestrian crossing signs, streetlights and heavy white paint.  It is almost impossible to believe that a driver should not anticipate that someone would be crossing at this location and therefore be on the lookout.  Perhaps the only other step that could be taken is the installation of a stop light or stop sign.  It seems doubtful, however, that a driver who missed all of the warnings would pay attention to a stop sign, or perhaps even a traffic light.

If you or a loved one were injured in a crosswalk accident, contacting an auto accident attorney might be the most important step to take in order to obtain compensation for the injuries and damages sustained.

SOURCE:  Crenshaw District hit-and-run crash kills man; suspect sought, ABC News, Los Anegeles, August 12, 2013, by Darsha Philips

Monday, August 12, 2013

Riverside Dog Attack on Sixth Street Sends Woman to Hospital

An unidentified woman sustained facial wounds and a gaping wound to her arm after being attacked by two pit bulls in Riverside this morning.  According to the Press Enterprise, the victim is between 45 and 50 years of age, and she was attacked while walking her dog just before 11:00 a.m. in the 6600 block of Sixth Street.   Reportedly, the woman's small dog was first attacked by the two pit bulls before being picked up and rescued by the woman.  The pit bulls then turned their aggression toward the woman.  A neighbor had to kick one of the dogs to stop its attack, and the other dog had to be pried from the woman's face.  The victim was rushed to the hospital where she apparently remains.  The two pit bulls were euthanized, and the owner is facing charges for having an unlicensed adult dog and for allowing both dogs to stray off of his property.

Dog Bite Liability Law in California

Under California law, the owner of a dog who bites someone is strictly (automatically) liable for the injuries and damages suffered by the victim (California Civil Code Section 3342).  Regardless of whether the dog or dogs have a known propensity for attacking, the owner is liable.  Pit bulls and pit bull mixes are generally known for being aggressive and having a particularly strong bite.  Consequently, a number of homeowners' insurance policies will not provide coverage if the dog is either a pit bull or a pit bull mix.  In simple terms, these insurance carriers do not want the responsibility of paying for what are often very serious, and sometimes life-threatening, bites.

The Injuries and Aftermath

It is not uncommon for the victim of a dog attack to suffer both physical and emotional injuries. Dog bites occur all too frequently here in the United States, and approximately 4.7 million people per year are attacked, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  Unfortunately, because facial bites can often be very deep and jagged, the wounds do not frequently heal well and some cannot even be reduced meaningfully by way of plastic surgery.  Aside from that, victims of horrendous attacks like the one above commonly suffer from a number of emotional injuries, similar if not identical to "post-traumatic stress disorder."  

If you or a loved one has been the victim of a dog attack, call an experienced dog bite attorney who can help assess the potential for recovering compensation for any injuries and damages suffered.  

SOURCE:  RIVERSIDE: Rescuer describes pit bulls’ attack on woman, The Press Enterprise, PE Bloggers, August 12, 2013, by Brian Rokos

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

OC Detox Facility to Surrender License After Patient Death


An Orange County detoxification and treatment facility has agreed to close its door and surrender its license following a State investigation by the Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs.  According to the ABC News report, the West Coast Detox Services facility in Huntington Beach agreed to the closure after a 28-year-old client was found dead on the premises in April of 2012.  The client, 28-year-old Jason Redmer, was found dead at the home, although the precise cause of death remains a mystery.  The complaint by the ADP includes allegations that Redmer and other clients were given highly-regulated drugs without a prescription and before seeing a doctor.  The State also alleged that West Coast Detox failed to destroy old medications kept on site, to which Redmer apparently gained access.  The ADP complaint also alleged that West Coast's failure to get Redmer medical help and destroy the old medications caused or contributed to his death.  Redmer had entered the facility just four days before his death to detox from drugs and alcohol.

Liability for Wrongful Death

When a patient or "client" dies while in the care and custody of a medical facility or detox center, questions regarding civil and even criminal responsibility will often be raised.  There is little doubt that taking on the responsibility of caring for someone who engages in self-destructive behavior can be difficult.  However, there are rules and regulations of the State and even Federal government that apply, and should set at least the minimum standard for the conduct of these facilities.  In the case above, West Coast Detox was alleged to have allowed a known drug addict and alcoholic access to potent, prescription medication.  Beyond that, the facility was also accused of failing to get Redmer the medical help he apparently needed.  These do not seem like particularly difficult requirements to comply with, and when a facility fails a patient in such a fragile condition, the outcome can be devastating to the patient and their family.  If violations of standards occur and a death results, the patient's family is entitled under the law to pursue a wrongful death lawsuit.

Proving Violations of the Standard of Care

In case involving medical treatment or drug rehabilitation, a violation of the standard of care must be established by competent, expert testimony.  While some violations might seem obvious, such as allowing a drug addict access to dangerous medications, much more often than not an expert with significant experience at drug counseling and/or medical monitoring of drug addicted patients will be necessary.  Under California law, when the subject of a lawsuit is "sufficiently beyond common experience" an expert's testimony may be offered to establish the plaintiff's case.  (California Evidence Code Section 801)  In the vast majority of medical malpractice cases, nearly all of them, an expert health care provider will have to testify that there was a breach of the "standard of care" in order to establish liability against the defendant.  The same is true for drug and alcohol rehabilitation facilities.

If you or a loved one has been the victim of medical neglect, consultation with an experienced malpractice attorney is often the best first step toward securing compensation and obtaining civil justice.

SOURCE:  Huntington Beach detox facility where man died is closing - exclusive, ABC News, Orange County, August 6, 2013, by Eileen Frere

Monday, August 5, 2013

OC Doctor Watch: Two OC Doctors Accused of Missing Fracture


How easy is it for a patient to find out whether their doctor, or a physician they are planning to see, has been sued for medical malpractice?  It's actually not that difficult if the physician practices in Orange County.  The Orange County Superior Court allows free access to their records dating back a number of years.  While the information is not guaranteed to be all inclusive or 100% accurate, the OC Courts website is a valuable tool for someone researching the background of their doctor.  This is especially true for people who have the option, under their insurance plan, to visit the doctor of their choosing.

Example:  Two Orange County Doctors Who Have Been Accused of Missing a Heel Fracture on X-rays

On October 18, 2010, a 28-year-old patient went into the TLC Medical Group office in Huntington Beach after a fall from a ladder.  The patient suspected that he had badly injured, if not broken, his right foot/ankle.  The physician on duty at the TLC urgent care, Francis Foo, M.D. (a family practice doctor), took three x-ray views of the foot and ankle, and reviewed those films in the office, while the patient was still present.  Dr. Foo did not identify a fracture, and the patient was discharged without such a diagnosis.  The films were reportedly forwarded to a board certified radiologist, Alexander S. Lin, Ph.D., M.D., who reviewed at least two of the x-ray views.  Dr. Lin's report was prepared on October 19th, and he too failed to identify any fracture on the films.  The patient (trusting the advice of  the two doctors) did not seek any further medical treatment for a number of months.  Unfortunately, the patient had indeed sustained a serious fracture of his right heel that mended in a gross malposition, leaving him with what is likely to be a lifelong problem.  One orthopedic expert who has examined the patient has recommended a complicated and expensive procedure, one that will result in a "fused" ankle and could cost between $30,000.00 and $50,000.00, including the cost of rehabilitation.  The lawsuit and arbitration claim against these two doctors is currently pending.

The Cost of Medical Errors

The cost to the patient of a medical error committed by their doctor can be devastating.  Patients, like the one above, can have their health seriously and permanently compromised, and they may have to undergo otherwise unnecessary medical procedures because of a physician's negligence.  Nearly one hundred thousand patients reportedly die every year because of preventable errors, according to some reports.  The cost to our national economy is thought to be in the tens ofbillions of dollars.  In spite of all of that, victims of malpractice and their families often find it difficult to obtain compensation or even hold the doctors accountable.  The civil justice system has built-in protections for doctors, such as California's Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA), that uniquely protect physicians to the detriment of their patients.  MICRA was enacted more than 35 years ago, and for that period of time it has limited the compensation a patient or their family can recover against a health care provider, no matter how outrageous the negligence might be.

If you have been injured or a family member has been killed because of a health care provider's negligence, a free consultation with a malpractice attorney is perhaps the best way to find out about your rights to compensation. 

Sunday, August 4, 2013

Venice Boardwalk Tragedy, Driver Runs Down Twelve


On Saturday evening at about 6:00 p.m., the driver of a dark-colored sedan plowed through the busy boardwalk area at Venice Beach, killing one and injuring eleven others.  According to KTLA News, the incident happened near the intersection of Dudley Avenue and Ocean Front Walk, and witnesses described the driver as "moving purposefully" at about 20 mph through the crowded boardwalk.  The victim who suffered fatal injuries has been identified as Alice Gruppioni, 32, from Bologna, Italy.  Gruppioni was reportedly on her honeymoon when she was run down.  Some of the other victims were treated and released at the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, and they ranged in age from 19 to 75, according to a statement from the hospital.  The driver of the sedan has been identified as Nathan Campbell, 38, who apparently turned himself into Santa Monica police roughly one hour after the tragedy.  He has been booked for murder, according to the news report.

The Need For Barricades

When a tragedy like the one above occurs, the first question that might come to mind is: How did someone drive their car into an area where only pedestrians should be allowed?  From an aerial view of the area, it is easy to see that there is access to the boardwalk from a number of intersecting streets and the beach parking lot.  It is not clear what steps, if any, had been taken to limit the access of motor vehicles or prevent it altogether.  One way to perhaps prevent motor vehicles from driving through areas like this is with raised, concrete or metal pylons.  That type of barrier is actually used elsewhere on the Venice Boardwalk, and it would seem such a safety measure is warranted in areas where a driver might gain access to a number of pedestrians and victims.  

The Willful Act of the Driver

When someone behind the wheel of their car acts intentional to harm someone else, an insurance exclusion may work to deny the injured any meaningful compensation.  In the case above, assuming that Campbell was indeed acting purposefully when he ran down the pedestrians, his automobile insurance carrier does not have to provide coverage and compensation to the injured parties.  Under California law, a liability insurance policy does not cover "willful acts", when someone acts intentionally to harm their victim.  While the driver may be liable individually for the harm they cause, the reality is that such liability has little meaning when the driver has little to no assets with which to pay a judgment.  This is particularly true when the one causing the accident injures more than one person, as in the incident on the Venice Boardwalk.

If you have been injured or a family member killed in an auto versus pedestrian accident, contacting a personal injury attorney with experience at handling such claims is an important first step to evaluating the merit of the claim and obtaining compensation.

SOURCE:  Woman Killed in Venice Boardwalk Hit-and-Run Was on Honeymoon, KTLA News, Local News, August 4, 2013, by Ann Pride

Thursday, August 1, 2013

Orange County Police Shooting - Suspect Killed Was Unarmed

A 22-year-old homeless man was shot and killed on Tuesday in Santa Ana, and officials are now confirming he was unarmed.  According to ABC News, the deceased, identified as Hans Arellano, had caused a disturbance at a Santa Ana McDonald's restaurant at around 3:00 p.m..  Arellano had allegedly been involved in two physical assaults on customers and was known to sleep behind the restaurant near the location of the shooting.  According to the news report, there was some sort of confrontation with police, and the officer fired.  While she reportedly had nonlethal weapons available, the officer apparently opted to draw and fire her service weapon instead.  The shooting is under investigation.

The Use of Deadly Force

In the past, police departments often had written policies regarding the use of deadly force that sometimes required an officer to discharge their firearm only after they had "exhausted every other reasonable means of apprehension", before firing.   It was sometimes stated that an officer could not fire their weapon until "all other means failed".  However, those policies did not necessarily set the standard in police misconduct cases that had to be proven in court by an alleged victim or their family.  Currently, the liability of a police officer and their employer, when it is alleged deadly force was unnecessarily used, is measured by a reasonableness standard.  Civil juries are asked  to determine the reasonableness of the officer's actions in light of “the totality of the circumstances at the time,” including “the severity of the crime at issue, and whether the alleged victim posed a reasonable threat to the safety of the officer or others".  Simply because some force was justified does not mean that an officer can simply open fire to bring a quicker, easier end to a confrontation or arrest.  The amount of force must be only that reasonably necessary to overcome the force being used by the suspect.  One way of looking at this is to ask the question: does a simple assault conviction (the allegation against Arellano) carry a death sentence? If the answer is no, and it is, then the shooting is one that has to be carefully examined.

Types Of Remedies Available

In a police misconduct case, the injured party may present both State law and Federal law claims.  Under State law, such cases often involve claims for negligence, assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment and wrongful death.  Under Federal law, an injured party may allege that their civil rights were violated under color of State law.  This is known as a Section 1983 claim as it is based on Title 42, Section 1983 of the United States Code.  These claims may all be combined in a single lawsuit that can be filed in State court.  The law in this area is very complicated, and the statute of limitations applicable typically requires that certain action against the public entity be taken within 6 months from the date of the incident.

If you or a loved one has been the victim of what you believe may have been police misconduct, contacting a personal injury attorney who handles such cases is perhaps the best way to find out whether a potential claim has merit.

SOURCE:  Man killed in Santa Ana police shooting was unarmed, ABC News, Orange County, July 31, 2013, by Eileen Frere