San Francisco Injury Lawyer Blog

Mechanic Death Highlights Issue of Oakland Workplace Fatalities

October 26, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

We work in order to pay our bills and provide the best possible life to our families. In some cases, work is physical and can be dangerous if proper precautions are not followed by both the employee and the employer. Workplace deaths can leave a family wondering what how they will get through the emotional loss and how they will recover from financial losses that stem from the death. In many cases, a worker’s compensation claim is the primary or only recourse for a claim stemming from a workplace injury. However, our Oakland workplace death attorney can help families find all possible sources of compensation following a tragic loss.

Oakland Mechanic Dies In Crane Accident

As reported in the San Francisco Chronicle, a fifty-one year old man died while working at the Port of Oakland on Wednesday morning. The unidentified victim was crushed while inspecting a crane at the Ben E. Nutter terminal. Peter Melton, a spokesperson for Cal/OSHA, said the man suffered head and chest injuries and died after being transported to an area hospital. A port spokesperson, Marilyn Sandifur, said that the crane belongs to Evergreen Marine Corporation. Cal/OSHA is launching an investigation into the circumstances leading up to the tragic accident.

Oakland Wrongful Death Attorney Comments on Tragic Morning on Bay Area Highways

October 24, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

Our Oakland injury law firm knows that Bay Area car accidents are all too frequent. In cases involving the death of a family member, our role often goes beyond just serving as legal advisors to include helping a family confront the grieving process. We recognize that no amount of compensation can ever bring back a lost loved one, but we know that obtaining damages via a wrongful death lawsuit can help with the financial aftereffect and that holding a wrongdoer responsible can also help in the emotional journey towards recovery.

Five Bay Area Accident Deaths in a Single Morning

The Oakland Tribune’s headline told much of the story: “Deadly Saturday morning on Bay Area highways: Five killed in crashes in San Jose and Half Moon Bay.” The fatalities resulted from two separate incidents, with the first occurring less than an hour into Saturday October 20. According to the California Highway Patrol, it may have been a stalled engine that left a Jeep stopped on the side of Highway 101 near the Blossom Hill Road exit. At 12:46 A.M., a Honda travelling at approximately sixty-five miles per hour crashed into the SUV. The collision caused the Jeep to flip and it tumbled down an accident. Four people were in the Jeep at the time of the crash and three died including a sixty-three year old Los Angeles man, a fifty-eight year old man from Carmel, and a fifty-four year old Los Angeles woman. Another source http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Brothers-identified-as-San-Jose-crash-victims-3972225.php identified two of the victims as brothers Mark and Chris Bava. The fourth passenger, a fifty-five year old female from Carmel, suffered minor injuries in the accident. Police did not immediately comment on whether the driver of the Honda, a twenty-eight year old San Jose woman, would face charges in the crash and did not say whether alcohol was a factor in the accident.

Understanding Class Action Litigation — Why Bring a Class Action?

October 22, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

At The Brod Firm, we strive to help every client recover. Our San Francisco plaintiff’s law firm takes cases we believe in and our team works hard to get our clients the full amount of damages available under California law. We also believe in helping clients navigate the legal system in the best possible manner. In some cases, the best method for resolving a dispute is not an individual suit but rather a class action, a lawsuit that allows multiple plaintiffs to bring their case collectively in either state (via a mix of statutory and case law) or federal court (via Federal Rule of Civil Procedure §23).

Efficiency & Cost-Effectiveness

There are a number of reasons why it may be better to bring a claim as a class action that as an individual suit. In cases where many plaintiffs share the same issues of law and fact, a class action can be more efficient than individual suits. The collective suit can avoid having the same issues, fact-based witnesses, and experts repeated countless times. This saves court costs and helps keep the civil system flowing efficiently. For example, suppose an allergy drug causes a dangerous side effect. Using the class action device can mean that issues like causation (proving the drug is responsible for the adverse effect) and the amount of advance knowledge the company had only need to be litigated once rather than proven again and again by each patient who suffered the dangerous side effect.

Lawsuit Seeks to Hold School Liable for Oakland Sexual Abuse Case Involving 14 Year-Old Child

October 19, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

There are few things as disturbing as the abuse of a child. Our Oakland sexual abuse lawyer understands that when sexual abuse occurs in a school setting, it is also a violation of our community’s trust. Early this year, we shared the story of Michael Merrick, a middle school teacher charged with the abuse of a teenage girl. Our comments also mentioned the potential that civil liability for sexual abuse by a teacher may go beyond the perpetrator himself (or, it is important to remember, herself) to include a school or district that turned a blind eye to the abuse. A recent update in The Oakland Tribune shows that such a case is now pending before the courts.

Civil Suit Expands to Include California School District

In January, Michael Merrick pleaded guilty to six felonies related to charges he abused a fourteen year old girl while serving as a teacher at Stanley Middle School. Charges against Merrick stemmed from private math tutoring sessions held in the school’s wood shop (Merrick previously worked in the math department but had moved to a role as shop teacher) and the evidence included hundreds of text messages with sexual theme. Per the criminal case, Merrick also coerced the young victim not to report the abuse. The criminal court sentenced him to five years and eight months in state prison and he is currently serving the term at North Kern State Prison in Delano. Since the resolution of criminal case, the girl’s family filed a civil suit against Merrick himself as well as the school district, Principal David Schrag, and District Superintendent Fred Brill. The suit seeks compensation for past and future medical costs, general damages, and a punitive award.

Meningitis Outbreak Linked to Contaminated Drugs

October 17, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

One of the stories dominating the headlines in recent weeks is the outbreak of fungal meningitis stemming from contaminated medications. As a San Francisco dangerous drugs law firm, we strongly believe that Americans should be able to trust the medicine they receive, whether purchased from a pharmacist, bought over the counter, or obtained directly from a provider during a medical procedure. The current outbreak is yet another reminder of the dangers involved with bad drugs.

Overview of the Outbreak

According to a report from CNN released early on Tuesday October 16, fifteen people had died as a result of the fungal meningitis outbreak. Authorities traced the outbreak to a contaminated steroid, methylprednisolone acetate. The drug is produced by the New England Compounding Center and the Center for Disease Control (“CDC”) recently estimated that medical offices gave the injectable product to approximately 14,000 people. The CDC reports that 214 cases of the disease have been linked to the contaminated medication, with cases spread across fifteen states. As a quick note, compounding pharmacies combine various ingredients to create a medication specifically made for a particular patient.

Another Reason to Drive Sober: Limited Civil Liability in California for Liquor Sales

October 16, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

Drivers at fault in an accident in the state of California may derive slight relief from the knowledge that juries award damages based on comparative negligence. Therefore, if a jury assigns liability to both the driver and the city where the accident happened for Dangerous Condition of Public Property, the city will share the liability with the at fault driver. The jury may even decide that the plaintiff was partially at fault for the accident and consequently limit the liability for the defendant. However, drivers who operate a vehicle under the influence cannot expect that the bar that served them that extra drink will be found liable for injuries they might cause as a result.

In the opinion written for Ruiz v. Safeway (2012), Cal.App.4th, the Court expounded on the history of civil liability for businesses that serve alcohol to customers who turn around and drive intoxicated. In the 1970’s, California courts started to question whether consumers were solely responsible for injuries caused by driving under the influence. A series of decisions came down that said that those who served excessive liquor to customers could foresee that intoxicated patrons would be likely to make bad decisions, which could lead to injuries and death. The courts allowed several negligence claims against purveyors of alcohol. However, the legislature did not like the implications of these decisions and, in 1978, it adopted Business and Professions Code 25602. Business and Professions Code 25602 states that no one who sells or gives an alcoholic beverage to an obviously intoxicated person “shall be civilly liable to any injured person or the estate of such person for injuries inflicted on that person as a result of intoxication by the consumer of such alcoholic beverage.” Although the supplier of alcohol cannot be held civilly liable, the statute provides that any such supplier may be found guilty of a misdemeanor.

Drunk drivers are responsible for their behavior in this state. According to statistics from the California Department of Motor Vehicles, in 2010 195,879 drivers were arrested for DUI in California and more than 26,000 were involved in injury and fatal accidents when driving under the influence. Those drivers are subject to criminal and civil penalties within the justice system, which takes a harsh stance against people who take theirs and others’ lives into their reckless hands. Injury victims must also take Business and Professions Code 25602 into consideration because, often, the drunk driver does not have the means to pay a judgment against him or her for the damage caused. The legislature’s decision to indemnify so-called dram shops protects business, but cuts off an avenue for injury victims to be compensated for their losses, pain, and suffering.

The exception that makes the rule lies in Business and Professions Code 25602.1. The statute makes any person who sells, causes to be sold, or gives alcohol to an obviously intoxicated minor liable for civil claims. The courts have been cautious to allow claims under this statute. For example, in the cases Salem v. Superior Court (1989), Cal.App.3d and Ruiz v. Safeway (2012), Cal.App.4th the courts threw out claims against businesses that sold alcohol consumed by a minor who subsequently drank and drove. In Ruiz v. Safeway, Morse, an intoxicated minor accompanied his passenger into Safeway where the clerk sold his passenger beer. Morse drank the beer and then killed another driver on the road. The court said it was not foreseeable that Morse would be drinking the alcohol sold to his passenger.

In Salem v. Superior Court, the court found that the corporation that owned the 7-11 franchise could not be held responsible if a franchisee sold alcohol to an intoxicated minor because it did not have any agency in the decision. Furthermore, the Court reiterated that the minor must be obviously intoxicated at the time of the sale for such a suit to have standing in the first place. Under the law, minors often have some flexibility when it comes to liability, but the law does not look kindly those that drink and drive, minors or otherwise. Don’t live with the guilt, don’t live with the criminal and civil penalties, don’t drink and drive.
Continue Reading ›

San Francisco Consumer Law Firm Applauds Ruling on the Use of the Term “Natural” on Food Labels

October 15, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

More and more Americans are looking to avoid too many processed chemicals and purchase more natural food products. While some people inspect every ingredient list, many rely on claims on the face of the product. Food labeling is a complex mix of marketing and truth, making it inevitable that consumers would eventually call a company to task over labeling claims.

Overview & Initial Rulings in Case About Food Labeling

Our San Francisco class action law firm is closely following a developing case about the use of the word “natural” on food labels. A group of plaintiffs filed a class action in a California federal court against Dreyer’s Grand Ice Cream. As detailed in a newsletter for the supermarket industry, the plaintiffs challenged the company’s labels and advertising that called certain products “all natural.” The class asserted that the claims were false and misleading given that the products contain between one and five synthetic and/or artificial ingredients (these will collectively be referred to as “artificial ingredients” in this article) and because one package fails to disclose that the cocoa in the product was processed using artificial agents.

Oakland Injury Attorney Comments on Coverage for Hit-and-Run Accidents

October 12, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

With his extensive experience as an Oakland personal injury lawyer, Greg Brod understands that car accidents leave victims with both physical and emotional scars. The mental suffering is compounded when the driver responsible for the crash fails to take responsibility for his or her actions. Hit-and-run accidents leave the victim and the community as a whole angry and looking for answers.

Fremont Hit-and-Run Injures Young Pedestrian

Residents of the City of Fremont are wondering who is responsible for an accident that injured a young teen. The story is currently running in the Oakland Tribune. At 7:30 A.M. on Monday October 8 officers responded to reports of an accident at the intersection of Nicolet Avenue and Mackenzie Place. According to Geneva Bosques, a police spokeswoman, a car struck a fourteen year old boy in the crosswalk. The teen incurred minor injuries and was taken to an area hospital by his father. Witnesses describe the driver as a Hispanic male between the ages of 35 and 45. Police report he was observed driving a red, four-door sedan, heading south on Nicolet Avenue in the direction of Alder Avenue.

Charges in Disability Insurance Scam

October 12, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

There is another insurance scam in California. According to recent news reports, a former sales associate with the American Family Life Assurance Company (AFLAC) was arrested this week on mail fraud charges over scamming $4 million in disability benefits from AFLAC by creating a fictitious employer.

Patricia Diane Smith Sledge from Irvine was charged by a federal grand jury with her part in the scam to submit fraudulent insurance claims to AFLAC for fake business with fake injured employees. In this type of fake employer scam, someone registers businesses that do not actually do anything and have no real employees. After registering the business, the scammers file claims of fake employees who lost their jobs or were injured and then take the unemployment and disability insurance benefit checks, which are sent through the mail.

Ms. Sledge was a sales associate with AFLAC who sold the disability policies to other people in the scheme. Soon after getting the policies, the claims for the fake injuries started coming in. Ms. Sledge received a portion of the illegal proceeds from this scam. She was fired by AFLAC in October 2011, due to an AFLAC internal investigation. Now she faces jail time, as each count of mail fraud (Ms. Sledge is charged with four counts)carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison.

School Zone Car Accident in Antioch Raises Major Safety Concerns

October 10, 2012 | Gregory J. Brod

School zone speed limits exist for a reason. Drivers often neglect to obey school zone rules, putting children and safety personnel at risk. Our Oakland personal injury law firm believes that civil injury suits serve to compensate victims and that they also serve as a preventative measure, providing an additional incentive for safe and responsible driving behavior.

Two Adults and One Child Injured in School Zone at Turner Elementary

According to The Oakland Tribune, school had only been in session for five minutes when an accident injured two adult and one child in front of Turner Elementary School in Antioch. Police report that the driver of a rented Audi SUV was speeding at around sixty miles per hour and generally driving carelessly in the eastbound lane of Delta Fair Boulevard at about 8:05 A.M. The SUV swerved around another vehicle that was stopped at a red traffic signal and hit three pedestrians before hitting another car that was turning onto School Street. The victims included a crossing guard, her eleven year old son, and another woman. Both adults suffered severe injuries and a medical helicopter transported them to John Muir Medical Center. The child suffered minor injuries. Witnesses report the crossing guard and the other woman were talking on the corner of a crosswalk and the boy, who was out of school for fall break and celebrating his birthday that day, was seated in a chair nearby.