California Proposition 213 restricts uninsured drivers from recovering general damages, or compensation for pain and suffering, following a car accident. Unfortunately, often times, insurance gaps happen, and so do auto accidents. In California, drivers are required to carry liability insurance when operating a motor vehicle on a public road.
California Prop 213 was created to prevent uninsured drivers from recovering money for pain and suffering following an accident. However, it does not limit your ability to recover medical costs, lost wages, or compensate you for future medical charges, if your accident was caused by a negligent driver. There are exceptions to the rule, and with a knowledgeable Glendale personal injury attorney, you can receive the compensation you deserve. Prop 213 does not apply to:
If you were uninsured and injured in a auto accident, our knowledgeable accident attorneys can help you get the compensation you deserve. Call us at (310) 943-1171, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for a free consultation tailored to the specifics of your case. Attorneys at KAASS Law speak English, French, Spanish, Russian, Armenian, and Italian.
Judgement or settlement which exceeds policy limits after denying a settlement offer within policy limits and the excess settlement rule. California Court of Appeals ruled that primary insurance companies are responsible for paying all losses in excess of policy limits after denying a within-limits settlement offer, regardless of whether the excess loss arises out of a verdict, judgment or a settlement.
The Second District California Court of Appeal’s August 5, 2016 opinion in Ace American Ins. Co. v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. found that “where the insured or excess insurer has actually contributed to an excess settlement, [the insured or excess insurer] may allege that the primary insurer’s breach of the duty to accept reasonable settlement offers resulted in damages in the form of the excess settlement.” The lack of a final judgment was immaterial, as there was “no persuasive reason to hold that the [policyholder] or its assignee, [the excess insurance company], must suffer that loss with no remedy simply because the case reached an eventual settlement instead of being litigated through trial.”
Multiple vehicle auto accidents are fairly common on California’s congested freeways, which begins with one driver rear ending another driver, resulting in a chain reaction that involves 3 or more vehicles. Alternatively, an accident may occur when a driver runs a red light and hits another car broadside, setting the stage for a multiple car pileup accident. Multi-vehicle car accidents create an added challenge for determining liability for injuries that vehicle occupants suffer. If you are involved in a multi car accident, it is vital you exchange insurance information with all the drivers involved, obtain witness contact information and contact the police to come to the scene and create a police report. It is also absolutely vital you take photographs of the scene, including skid marks, vehicle debris and property damage from multiple angles. If you suffer injury due to pile up accident in our area, you can contact our experienced Glendale auto accident attorney soon after the accident in order to ensure that all pertinent evidence is immediately identified and documented. If you or a loved one has been involved in a multi-car accident, we invite you to contact a car accident attorney in Glendale, CA for a and . Our office will handle your car accident claim, set you up with health care professionals for any needed treatment. We don't charge you any upfront legal fees, as we charge a contingency fee, meaning you don't pay, unless we are able to recover money damages from the responsible parties.
When a loved one passes away due to the negligence of another party, California law allows for two different types of lawsuits that can be against the negligent party. A California wrongful death lawsuit may be filed by the representative of the deceased’s estate, or by the decedent’s surviving spouse, children or other dependent family members. While, a survival cause of action can be filed by the estate’s personal representative, or if none has been appointed, by the decedent’s successor-in-interest. A survival cause of action can only be brought if the decedent did not immediately die from his injuries. The survival statute allows one to “step into the shoes” of the deceased and recover the damages the had they lived, including and , such as:
California law requires all drivers to purchase insurance that offers minimum liability amount of $15,000 of bodily injury coverage per person up to a maximum of $30,000 if two or more people are injured. In addition, drivers must also carry a minimum of $5,000 for property damage coverage. Oftentimes, if you are injured in an auto accident, the driver at fault may only have the state minimum, while your damages may be far more. For instance, if your total medical bills were over $15,000 and the at-fault party only have $15,000, you may not be able to recover for damages for pain and suffering.
Luckily, if your insurance policy also contains Uninsured Motorist "UM" and Underinsured Motorist "UIM" coverage, you may be able to file a claim under your UIM coverage. Underinsured motorist coverage will be able to provide a limited amount of coverage for injuries sustained by you and your passengers. This occurs when you are involved in an accident with another motorist who does not have enough insurance to pay for your injuries.
Traumatic brain injury is divided into two categories -- mild and severe. A traumatic brain injury is considered mild if a loss of consciousness lasts for less than 30 minutes. On the other hand, traumatic brain injury is considered severe, if a loss of consciousness lasts for more than an hour.
Signs of a mild traumatic brain injury include,
Signs of a moderate to severe brain injury may begin within days and symptoms include:
The new law will make it illegal for Uber drivers to drive with a BAC (blood alcohol content) of 0.04 or higher. Effective July 1, 2018, California ride-sharing drivers, like Uber and Lyft , and other commercial-for-hire vehicles will have stringent DUI laws.
The AB 2687 bill will amend the Vehicle Code Section 23152 (e): Commencing July 1, 2018, it shall be unlawful for a person who has 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a motor vehicle when a passenger for hire is a passenger in the vehicle at the time of the offense, and concurrently to do any act forbidden by law or neglect any duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, which act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to any person other than the driver. For purposes of this subdivision, “ means a passenger for whom consideration is of carriage in the vehicle.
Under California law, drivers are required to carry liability insurance when operating a motor vehicle on a public road. If you were involved in an accident, due to the fault of another, while operating a motor vehicle without liability insurance you likely fall under "Proposition 213". Under California law, uninsured motorists involved in traffic collisions within the State of California, whether or not the collision was caused by the uninsured motorist, are not allowed to recover general damages such as pain and suffering. HOWEVER, there are exceptions to Prop 213. For instance, Prop 213 strictly applies strictly to drivers and not its passengers. If you have been involved in a car, truck, motorcycle, bus or other motor vehicle accident, do not rely on this as legal advice. Speak to a Glendale accident attorney today and request a free consultation
There are certain exceptions to Prop 213. For instance, Prop 213 does NOT limit your ability to recover medical costs, lost wages, damaged property, or compensate you for future medical charges. As an uninsured motorist, Proposition 213 creates serious difficulties, fears, and frustrations to your accident claim. Regardless of your insurance status, adjusters are skilled in limiting the damages you can recover. Even if you are entitled to compensation, insurance companies can hold your lack of coverage against you in your claim. Thus, if you fall under Prop 213 uninsured motorists, your difficulties just got harder. There are exceptions to the rule, and with a knowledgeable and established , you can receive the compensation you deserve.
Under California Vehicle Code § 21801 (a) The driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left or to complete a U-turn . . . shall yield 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. According to California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI) a “hazard” exists if: "any approaching vehicle is so near or is approaching so fast that a reasonably careful person would realize that there is a danger of a collision [or accident]." In other words, the driver who is attempting to make a left turn must ensure that no oncoming vehicles are close enough to be a hazard before he or she proceeds across each lane the driver of a vehicle will yield the right of way, until the turn may be made with reasonable safety.
Before we dive into determining fault in a left turn motorcycle collision, it is important to understand the term "Negligence", which is a term used to characterize conduct that creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others. In order to prove negligence you must prove:
Many times, product liability lawsuits can arise out of a motorcycle accident. In Soule v. GM, “A manufacturer, distributor, or retailer is liable in tort if a defect in the manufacture or design of its product causes injury while the product is being used in a reasonably foreseeable way.” This is one of many that defines defective motorcycle gear and product liability laws. It's quite often that faulty tires, helmets, or jackets, can be a cause or worsen a motorcycle accident. Helmets and jackets alone can be exacerbate a motorcyclist’s injuries in the event of an accident. This is why we have defective motorcycle gear and product liability laws.
If a motorcycle manufacturer fails to warn or label the risk towards the consumer, the item is therefore defective.
In order words, in the event that a policyholder(s) do not have excess insurance, policyholders should argue that their first party insurance company or primary insurer who rejected a within-limits settlement offer is obligated to pay the full amount of any subsequent settlement which exceeds that insured's policy limits. There is no reason why the first party insured should be forced to contribute or pay a settlement of which first party insured could recover by filing at first party bad faith action against their primary insurance company.
California insurance bad faith actions arise when insurance company breaches the implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing. Insurance companies must, unreasonably or without proper cause, act or fail to act in a manner that deprives the insured of the benefits of the policy. It is not a mere failure to exercise reasonable care. However, it is not necessary for the insurer to intend to deprive the insured of the benefits of the policy. Generally, the term bad faith for insurance purposes means an insurance company:
The court found that when an insurer's failure to reasonably settle a claim within policy limits, after primary or "first party" insurance rejected a within-limits settlement offer and there is a judgement against their insured/policyholder, whether by settlement or verdict, the first party insurance company must pay any excess monies, whether through jury verdict, settlement, or judgment. Policy limits demands can be a powerful tool for plaintiffs' insurance lawyers and can cause headaches for claims adjusters. While, it all depends on the circumstances surrounding the claim or issue, an insurer that misses an opportunity for a reasonable settlement of a claim against its insured can now be liable for the full amount of a later judgment, regardless of the policy limits. If you believe that your primary insurance company rejected a within-limits settlement offer and an later there was a subsequent settlement or judgement which exceeds your policy limits or you believe that your insurance company may be acting in bad faith, speak to one of our Los Angeles insurance lawyers for a free consultation and case review. Call our office at (310) 943-1171, our attorneys speak English, French, Spanish, Russian, Armenian, and Italian.
Determining fault in a multi-car accident is the biggest barrier to overcome in these types of accidents. From a factual perspective, determining causation can be tricky. In a case where a driver admits to being distracted and being the first car to rear-end another car in a line of cars, it may be appropriate to assign that driver 100% liability. Often times however, there are other factors at play including, bad weather conditions, driving to close to another vehicle, road construction, drunk driving, or aggressive driving. Thus, it is vital to speak with a car accident attorney that has experience with handling multi-car accident insurance claims.
When tailgating contributes to a multiple vehicle auto accident, all drivers who tailgated potentially shares some liability for causing injuries of occupants in vehicles that are ahead of the tailgating driver. The driver of the vehicle that collides with the car at the end of the chain likely has the greatest fault. On the other hand, if the driver of the car at the end had followed the next car at a greater distance, perhaps that driver’s car would not have been pushed into the car that he or she was following. Chain reaction accidents or multi car accident in a “stop and go” traffic scenario also create issues of comparative negligence. Generally, drivers are not held responsible for following another vehicle too closely when the vehicles in traffic are stopped, but if the chain reaction collision occurs while the cars are in motion, the legal notion of "comparative negligence"comes into play. If some cars are in motion but others are not, sorting out responsibility becomes a difficult task. If you were involved in an chain reaction or multi-auto accident call or contact our Glendale personal injury attorneys for a free consultation. We will fully review your case, answer any questions you may have, and explain the process as you move forward.
[video width="1280" height="720" mp4="https://kaass.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/output_HD72018.mp4"][/video]
In wrongful death cases, plaintiffs are the surviving family members of the decedent and can seek to recover economic damages. This includes financial support the decedent would have contributed to the family during the lifetime of the decedent or plaintiff. Also, loss of gifts or benefits that plaintiff would have expected to receive from decedent. Lastly, funeral/burial expenses reasonable value of household services that decedent would have provided to his or her loved ones. Additionally, the surviving family members may also seek non-economic damages. This includes loss of decedent’s love, companionship, loss of services, loss of support, comfort, care, assistance, protection, and moral support. Loss of the enjoyment of sexual relations and loss of decedent’s training and guidance are also real factors.
A survival cause of action in California can only be brought if the decedent did not pass from the injuries. If the deceased lived for a period between the accident and death, considering to file under survival cause of action. The representative of decedent's estate may seek to recover damages. This includes, “the loss or damage that the decedent sustained or incurred before death, including any penalties or punitive or exemplary damages that the decedent would have been entitled to recover had the decedent lived, and do not include damages for pain, suffering, or disfigurement". If you and your family are considering filing either a wrongful death or survival action lawsuit, or both if the circumstances permit, we invite you to contact one of our Los Angeles personal injury attorneys today for a free consultation and case review. KAASS LAW has successfully represented victims in wrongful death and survival cause of actions.
This content is intended for educational purposes only. KAASS LAW is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information, which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS LAW expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS LAW does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS LAW in person at the KAASS LAW office. KAASS LAW helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda, San Diego, La Jolla, El Cajon, Chula Vista, Del Mar
Uninsured motorst coverage provides protection for you and your pasangers for bodily injury sustained in the event the at fault party is not insured. As such, you and your passangers can file UM claims with your insurance company to recover compensation for your injuries. Unfortunately, oftentimes insurance companies use various tactics to try to avoid paying claims that are filed by their own insureds. Thus, it is very important to seek advice from an experienced Glendale personal injury lawyer as soon as possible to help preserve your claim. On the other hand, if you feel that your insurance company is wrongfully denying your claim, it is vital you seek advice from a personal injury attorney that has experience in handling first-party insurance bad faith claims.
There are several scenarios of how insurance adjusters try to deny and or devalue your UM and UIM claim. Some of these examples include the following:
Get help from an experienced personal injury attorney following an accident in California with an uninsured or underinsured motorist. Our personal injury attorney at KAASS Law team for a free no-obligation consultation, we are available 24/7. We also provide 24/7 accident assistance, call now at (310) 943-1171.
[contact-form][contact-field label='Name' type='name' required='1'/][contact-field label='Phone' type='text' required='1'/][contact-field label='Email' type='email' required='1'/][contact-field label='Message' type='textarea' required='1'/][/contact-form]
Often times, common traumatic brain injury symptoms are not immediately apparent. It may take several days or weeks for traumatic brain injury symptoms to surface. This depends on a number of factors including how severe was the incident. It is important to speak to your physician's if you begin to notice physical or behavioral changes. You should also consider receiving an MRI of your brain. A thorough neurological examination or a brain imaging scan should reveal any damage to the brain's surface.
It is important to collect all the documentation and medical records that are related to the injury. Also, it is a good idea to keep a journal and keeping track of the time and effects the injury has on your daily life. Consult with an experienced traumatic brain injury lawyer. Your attorney will consult with out on your options, whether there was any potential negligence that can be asserted against the third party. You may be able to collect monetary compensation, the cost of therapy, medical expenses, loss of income, reduced quality of life, and more for a traumatic brain injury cases. Have you or a loved one suffered a traumatic brain injury due to the negligence of another? A Los Angeles personal injury attorney from KAASS Law may be able to provide you with legal assistance.
Moreover, this considers to the owner, operator, agent, or any other person having an interest in the vehicle. In a prosecution under this subdivision, there is a rebuttable presumption of this matter. If a person had 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of driving the vehicle if the person had 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of the performance of a chemical test within three hours after the driving.
For questions about your Los Angeles Uber accident case or any Uber or Lyft related accidents, we invite you to call our office and speak to our Los Angeles uber accident attorney for free consultation. We speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, French, and Italian.
KAASS LAW is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS LAW expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions or inactions based on contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS LAW does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS LAW in person.
KAASS LAW helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.
It is important to find an experienced accident attorney that is experienced with accidents involving Prop 213. KAASS LAW is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS LAW helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.
In theory both a rider and the motorist can potentially be partially responsible for causing the left turn collision. For instance under the comparative negligence theory a party may contribute to an act of negligence or be comparatively negligent for his or her own injuries. However, it is important to remember that recovery for damages will be reduced by the percentage of fault associated with that matter. For instance, if you were found 20% at fault for causing the accident, your settlement and or judgement will be reduced by 20% of the entire dollar amount settled or awarded.
There are several problems with this. First off, even if there is a traffic collision report, stating that the driver of the car was at fault, the traffic collision report is hearsay. As a matter of fact, it cannot get admitted as evidence to prove the dynamics of the motorcycle accident. Also, the insurance company also doesn’t have to consider this as proof of fault. The insurance company attorneys not having to consider the traffic accident report, will begin placing blame on the innocent victim. They might claim, the rider wasn’t being inattentive. Or they may say you weren’t riding at a safe speed during the collision. Then again, they might claim the rider should have yielded. The Endless Insurance Company Excuses. They can also claim the motorcyclist was not wearing bright enough clothing or anything else. Hence they may argue the motorcyclist at fault instead of the insured auto driver. So besides being worried about getting your bike fixed and custom motorcycle parts, now you have to PROVE it was not your fault.
Negligence determines who was at fault and their degree of the blame. Both a rider and the motorist can be partially responsible. The biker can still recover money. Some of these accidents take place due to the motorcyclist passing a larger vehicle in the same travel lane. In fact, that could have obscured him from an oncoming vehicle turning left. The other motorist usually fails to have enough reaction time to complete the left turn safely. This makes the car into a wall of steel, ejecting the rider from their bike. The rider may have been reckless. So starting a motorcycle lawsuit is not always the answer. A unique factor to consider remains that most insurance companies refuse to pay money after a rider gets smacked down.
We provide 24/7 motorcycle accident hot line available for victims involved in motorcycle accidents. Speak to a Los Angeles motorcycle accident attorney today. Our motorcycle accident lawyers charge our clients' zero upfront legal fees. You pay nothing until and unless we successfully secure a settlement or judgement.
Experienced and inexperienced riders must be ready to deal with every roadside contingency in as little as microseconds. Motorcycle accidents normally occur blue and are totally unpredictable. Only sturdy boots, helmets and other gear reduce harm. But when coupled with training and muscle memory it can prevent harm.
We provide 24/7 motorcycle accident hotline available for victims involved in motorcycle accidents. Speak to a Los Angeles motorcycle accident attorney today. Our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Russian, Armenian, and French.
Location: 701 North Brand Blvd. Suite 100 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (310) 943-1171 Email: [email protected]
KAASS LAW is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS LAW expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS LAW does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS LAW in person at the KAASS LAW office. KAASS LAW helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.
Under state law, product liability in California is "strict liability". A Plaintiff does not have to prove negligence by the manufacturer or any in the chain of distribution. However, the Plaintiff must meet the burden of proof in order to recover monies for injuries sustained. In Anderson v. Owens- Corning Fiberglas Corp, “Strict liability has been invoked for three types of defects—manufacturing defects, design defects, and ‘warning defects,’ i.e., inadequate warnings or failures to warn.”
Also, in Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc., “A manufacturer is strictly liable in tort when an article he places on the market, knowing that it is to be used without inspection for defects, proves to have a defect that causes injury to a human being… The purpose of such liability is to insure that the costs of injuries resulting from defective products are borne by the manufacturers that put such products on the market rather than by the injured persons who are powerless to protect themselves.”
In the case of Elmore v. American Motors Corp., “[T]he doctrine of strict liability may not be restricted on a theory of privity of contract. Since the doctrine applies even where the manufacturer has attempted to limit liability, they further make it clear that the doctrine may not be limited on the theory that no representation of safety is made to the bystander...." Going further on the case, "If anything, bystanders should be entitled to greater protection than the consumer or user where injury to bystanders from the defect is reasonably foreseeable. Consumers and users, at least, have the opportunity to inspect for defects and to limit their purchases to articles manufactured by reputable manufacturers and sold by reputable retailers, whereas the bystander ordinarily has no such opportunities. In short, the bystander is in greater need of protection from defective products which are dangerous, and if any distinction should be made between bystanders and users, it should be made, contrary to the position of defendants, to extend greater liability in favor of the bystanders.”
In most motorcycle products liability cases, an expert witness testimony is a requirement to prove any defective products.
In California civil lawsuits, jurors are given jury instructions in order to help them determine whether the Defendant(s) should be held liable for injuries caused to the Plaintiff(s). A list of jury instructions can be found on the CACI Series 1200 Products Liability Section.
Give us a call! Speak to a experienced motorcycle accident attorney and motorcycle product liability attorney. We are located in Glendale, Los Angeles County, CA. Our attorneys speak English, French, Spanish, Russian, Armenian, Hebrew, Farsi, and Arabic. [video width="1280" height="720" mp4="https://kaass.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/output_HD7204.mp4"][/video]