In California, when someone's conduct is particularly egregious, the court may award "punitive damages" on top of compensatory damages. These damages are not meant to compensate the victim for their losses but to punish the defendant and deter similar behavior in the future. At KAASS LAW, we have extensive experience handling cases involving punitive damages and understand the complexities of pursuing these claims. The following will explores the concept of punitive damages in California, explaining when they are awarded, how they are calculated, and the legal strategies involved in securing them.
Punitive damages are damages that a defendant in a civil action can be ordered to pay to punish him for egregious conducting including employment claims and personal injury. Commonly, punitive damages can’t be awarded for a simple breach of contract, but can be awarded in cases such as insurance company bad faith when the company unlawfully refuses to pay a legitimate claim. California Civil Code Section 3294 allows a jury to award punitive damages to the plaintiff in a personal injury case. The plaintiff must be able to establish convincing and clear evidence that the defendant's conduct amounted to oppression, malice or fraud.
California Civil Code Section 3294(c) gives the following definition to “malice,” “oppression” and “fraud”:
When dealing with a company as opposed to a private person, California Civil Code section 3294 states that the employer shouldn’t be legally liable for punitive damages, based upon acts of his employee, unless the employer had reasonable knowledge of the unfitness of the employee and hired him with a conscious disregard of the rights or safety of other people or ratified or authorized the illegal conduct for which the damages are awarded, or was personally guilty of fraud, oppression, or malice. With respect to a corporate employer, the reasonable knowledge and conscious disregard, ratification, authorization, or act of oppression, malice or fraud must be on the part of the director, officer, or managing agent of the corporation.
Some common scenarios include the following:
According to CACI 3940 the jury considers several factors when deciding the amount of punitive damages. Here are some of them:
Pursuing punitive damages requires careful legal strategy and thorough preparation. KAASS LAW can help you:
If you believe you may have a claim for punitive damages, contact KAASS LAW today for a free consultation. We have the experience and expertise to help you navigate the complexities of these claims and fight for the justice you deserve. We understand that pursuing a legal claim can be a daunting process, especially when you're dealing with the aftermath of a wrongful act. Our team is dedicated to providing compassionate and dedicated legal representation, guiding you through every step of the process and advocating for your rights.
Fraud against the government wastes taxpayer dollars and undermines essential public programs. The California False Claims Act (CFCA) is a powerful tool for combating fraud and holding accountable those who seek to defraud the state or local governments. At KAASS LAW, we commit to protecting the public interest and pursuing justice against those who engage in fraudulent activities. As a result, the following will navigate an overview of the CFCA. As a result, we will be explaining its key provisions, the types of fraud it covers, and how individuals can play a role in exposing fraud against the government. We strive for our readers and clients to stay informed!
The California False Claims Act (CFCA) is a law which provides civil penalties for business entities or individuals who commit certain forms of theft, embezzlement or fraud with respect to state or local government funds. CFCA allows a public entity to recover damages from any entity or person that knowingly presents a false claim for any payment or approval.
According to CACI 4800, the plaintiff must be able to prove all the following elements to establish the claim:
Loss of consortium is the loss of moral support, companionship, or intimacy following an injury to a person’s spouse or registered domestic partner.
In California, a claim of loss of consortium can be brought by the spouse or child of a person who was injured by the negligent conduct of a third party. The cause of action arises when a third party negligently or intentionally injures the plaintiff’s spouse such that the plaintiff no longer enjoys the injured spouse’s conjugal companionship, society, and sexual relations (Rodriguez v. Bethlehem Steel Corp. (1974) 12 Cal.3d 382, 408.)
A spouse of an injured person must be able to establish the following elements to prove a loss of consortium lawsuit:
Supervisor Liability: Under the theory of Respondent Superior, there is no vicarious liability for the actions of a subordinate just because a person is a supervisor. Just knowledge about a violation is not enough to impose supervisory liability, thus for pursuing a supervisory liability claim, a plaintiff must be able to show the following:
According to CACI 3005 in case the plaintiff claims that the defendant is personally liable for his harm he must be able to prove the following elements to establish the claim:
According to California Penal Code Section 350 it is prohibited to willfully manufacture, intentionally sell, or knowingly possess for sale any counterfeit mark registered with the Secretary of State or registered on the Principal Register of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
The prosecutor must be able to establish the following element to convict the defendant of manufacturing, sale, or possession for sale of counterfeit goods under PC Section 350:
According to California Product Liability Laws, any person who designs, produces or sells a defective product is strictly liable for the damages by the product. This will further explain the following in motorcycle parts product liability.
Generally, a plaintiff must be able to establish the following elements, to prevail on a claim for products liability in California,
Under the strict liability law, it is not a requirement for the plaintiff to demonstrate the defendant’s negligence. Under the law, if the plaintiff got any injuries as a result of the defendant, then the defendant is labile for the injuries, with or without negligence.
According to 18 USC Section 1001 it is illegal to knowingly and willfully making any materially fictitious, false, or fraudulent statement or representation in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, judicial and legislative branch of the United States.
The government must be able to establish the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt for convicting the defendant under 18 USC 1001.
In the context of 18 USC 1001 a statement, can be either be in writing or oral. The representation or statement is not a requirement to be a legal mandate or be under oath to violate 18 USC Section 1001. It also doesn’t have to receive by the government or made directly to the government.
Chapter 18 of the United States Code, Section 371 criminalizes both conspiracies to defraud the US as well as conspiracies to violate any other provision of federal law. According to the statute it is illegal for two or more persons to conspire either for committing an offense against the US, or to defraud the United States, or any agency in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of these persons act in a way that furthers the conspiracy.
The prosecution must establish the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt for convicting the defendant in violation of 18 U.S.C Section 371
For the purposes of this statute term “to defraud” in the United States means:
Sexual assault by Uber drivers is not uncommon, and the sexual assault itself is prevalent all over. A person must give consent for being touched, and without consent, anyone who is touching or behaving inappropriately can be targeted for assault or harassment.
Sexual Assault, Touching, or Rape in an Uber Examples of sexual and physical attacks include:
Depending on the nature of the crime a number of injuries in addition to sexual assault can be caused to the victim. Here is an incomplete list of injures:
In California all drivers of TNCs (transportation network companies), such as Uber, are required to have a rideshare insurance at all times when the app is on. When the app is switched on, the Uber driver’s time is divided into three periods. Uber then decides when its insurance is applicable based on the period the accident happened. Uber's insurance coverages work different ways depending on which "period" the coverage falls under as it may impact your Uber accident claim. The rideshare app is off: The driver's personal insurance is active, which must meet California's minimum auto insurance requirements.
California law has the following minimum auto insurance requirements while rideshare app is on but the driver hasn’t been paired with a passenger.
Here is the list of some actions which constitute a violation of CFCA
For purposes of CFCA, a "claim" means a request for money, services, or property that will be provided directly or indirectly by the California state government or a local government.
With respect to information about the claim, "knowingly "means that:
To establish the claim, the plaintiff doesn't have to prove the specific intent of defrauding. "Material" means that the claim had a tendency to influence, or was capable of influencing, the payment or receipt of money, services, or property on the claim.
The CFCA imposes an additional legal responsibility for reporting false claims if a person has inadvertently received a benefit from a false claim, such as an accidental overpayment that goes unreported.
In case the defendant is found guilty in violation of the California False Claims Act, they will have to pay:
Under certain circumstances, such as self-reporting within 30 days or full cooperation, the penalties may have a reduction.
Under California law, the CFCA must be before the later of the following dates:
The CFCA allows private citizens to file qui tam lawsuits on behalf of the government to expose fraud. Also, in qui tam lawsuit, the relator, or whistleblower, brings the action on behalf of the government and shares in any recovery. The qui tam provisions of the CFCA:
Filing a qui tam lawsuit under the CFCA is a complex process that requires careful consideration and legal expertise. Additionally, lawsuit must be filed under a seal to allow the government time to investigate the allegations. The relator must provide the government with all evidence and information they have about the alleged fraud.
Fraud against the government wastes taxpayer dollars and undermines essential public services. As a result, the CFCA empowers individuals to play a crucial role in exposing fraud and holding accountable those who seek to defraud the government. We can guide you through understanding your rights and options under the CFCA, helping you take the necessary steps to protect the public interest. Also, If you're looking to file a claim against the California Government, we’re ready to assist you! Contact KAASS LAW today if you're seeking legal advice or consultation.
The plaintiff must prove that the defendant committed a wrongful act against his spouse or domestic partner. Such acts can include:
Generally, the judge or a jury will determine how much value to give a plaintiff for a claim for loss of consortium. Factors considered in loss of consortium claims include loss of:
Loss of consortium falls under the category of non-economic damages, this means that the loss is intangible, and can’t be proven through documentation. Because of the nature of the injury, spouses in loss of consortium cases will be asked about their marriages before the injury. While determining the amount of compensation the courts can consider the stability of the marriage, each spouse’s life expectancy, and the degree to which the benefits of the marriage were lost.
According to CACI 3920, the spouse of the injured person can recover damages to reasonably compensate for the past and future loss of the injured person’s companionship and services.
Damages that are not recoverable in loss of consortium claims include:
A loss of consortium recovery will be correspondingly reduced in case the injured spouse was contributorily negligent. This means that in case the injured spouse’s negligence was partially caused the injury, then the other spouse’s compensation for loss of consortium will be reduced correspondingly.
If you believe you may have a loss of consortium claim we invite you to contact our personal injury attorneys today at (310) 943-1171 for a free consultation.
[video width="1280" height="720" mp4="https://kaass.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/output_HD720-4.mp4"][/video]
When the supervisor is found responsible for causing harm to the plaintiff based on deliberate indifference, then he is being held liable for his own wrongful action or inaction, but not held vicariously liable for the wrongful actions or inactions of his subordinates
According to California Civil Code Section, 2351a sub-agent, legally appointed, represents the principal in like manner with the original agent; and the original agent cannot be liable to third persons for the acts of the sub-agent. Thus, the general rule is that an agent is not responsible for the unlawful act of an employee when the agent is acting on behalf or in an official capacity of the principal; hence the term, “agency immunity rule.” There are substantive exceptions to hold supervisory authority liable for the actions of their employees.
A supervisor can be liable for the actions of the employee if he is guilty of negligence in the appointment of such sub-agent. The negligence can include a decision to hire an employee despite knowledge of wrongful conduct of the employee.
According to California Civil Code Section 2343, a supervisor can be responsible for the torts of an employee within the scope of authority, rather than in an individual capacity. In case the supervisor authorizes or directs an unlawful act of the subagent, or improperly cooperates in the subagent’s acts, then he can be held liable for his illegal conduct.
A supervisor with expansive authority over the hiring, management or firing his employee can be liable for the illegal conduct of the employee, in case he had prior knowledge of the tendencies of its employees to commit such conduct. For any further legal assistance, please contact KAASS LAW today!
Penalties for manufacturing or selling counterfeit marks under PC Section 350 depend on the value and the number of the counterfeit goods. Manufacturing or selling counterfeit marks is a misdemeanor in case:
Manufacturing or selling counterfeit marks is a wobbler in case:
Wobbler is a crime that can be charged as either a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the number of factors. Penalties for a felony conviction are the following:
In case the defendant has a prior conviction for manufacturing or selling counterfeit marks, then the second offense is always a wobbler even if the number of counterfeit goods is less than 1,000 and the value of counterfeit items is less than $950. The penalties are the same as for a wobbler conviction with the exception in the amount of the fine:
The defendant will face harsher penalties if the manufacture or sale of the counterfeit items caused great bodily injury or death or to another person, who used the items, thinking that it was genuine. In that case, defendant always faces felony conviction with up to two, three or four years in a county jail.
There are essentially three types of claims under strict product liability:
In manufacturing defect claims, if you can compare the product in question with another product in the same line within the manufacturer, the product falls into manufacturing defect claim. So, the product presented a harm which actually was a result of the manufacturing defects.
If the plaintiff asserts that the defect is in all the same product line, then it falls under design defect claims. In California, there are two test in defective design product liability claims:
According to this test, after the plaintiff shows that the defective product design caused the injuries, the burden of proof completely shifts to the defendant. The defendant must prove that the utility of the defective product design outweighs the risk of the design and in case he fails to do that, then the plaintiff will win the case.
According to this test a product’s design will be considered defective in case it fails to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect it to perform.
According to California strict product liability, a defendant who is aware that the consumer is using the product in a reasonably foreseeable manner that exposes him to a risk of injuries is obliged to warn the consumer of the risk of injury or harm. The defendant can be liable for a failure to warn when such failure to change the outcome. So, in case a typical consumer is aware of the risk of injuries or harm on his own, then the defendant can’t be found liable for failing to warn of an already-known hazard. Get in touch with our Los Angeles motorcycle accident attorneys for more information and a free consultation! [contact-form][contact-field label="Name" type="name" required="true" /][contact-field label="Email" type="email" required="true" /][contact-field label="Website" type="url" /][contact-field label="Message" type="textarea" /][/contact-form]
In the context of 18 USC Section 1001 charge, willfulness means that the defendant intentionally and voluntarily provided facts that were incorrect. Untrue statements or incorrect facts provided result of misunderstanding, confusion, honest mistakes, or faulty recollection don’t rise to the level of willfulness.
Prosecution for a violation of 18 USC Section 1001 requires proof of materiality. The statement or representation must have a tendency to influence, or be capable of influencing the decision making body to which it is addressed. There is no requirement to prove that the decision maker body was in fact of influence or diversion.
Jurisdictional element means that the government must establish that the false statement or representation is in regard to a matter within the US government’s jurisdiction. Courts have given broad interpretation to “jurisdiction” in this context to mean any area where the government has power to act or enforce regulations. Jurisdiction includes the healthcare, economy, education, and many other areas.
It is a valid defense if the defendant made a false statement because of an honest mistake, or confusion. A simple misunderstanding can also be a defense.
The defense challenges whether a statement or representation is relevant or important enough for being considered material to a federal matter. A defense also applies when the false statement is not made within the government’s jurisdiction or to a government agent. The penalties for violation 18 USC Section 1001
The prosecution must establish that the defendant had some knowledge of the conspiracy’s objectives. But for being considered a participant in a conspiracy defendant doesn’t have to know about every objective of the conspiracy, or be aware of the identities of other conspirators. Overt Act is any act or statement that is knowingly done by one or more conspirators with intention to further the aim of the conspiracy. It is important to mention that a conviction for conspiracy under 18 U.S.C Section 371does not necessarily require underlying criminal act to be completed.
According to 18 U.S. Code 371, for being found guilty defendant must intend to agree, and have intention to commit the crime. A forced agreement made under threat or duress or is not enough for convicting the defendant.
According to 18 U.S. Code 371 there must be an overt act to further the conspiracy. So if a conspiracy agreement was found, but no act was made to further the alleged agreement, defendant should not be convicted of federal conspiracy. Penalties for violating 18 U.S.C Section 371
The following are the steps the victim must undertake:
In the state of California for personal injury, claims victim has up to two years from the date of the act to file a claim. In case the victim exceeds this statute of limitations, the claim can be outright denied. Therefore, it is important to file a claim against Uber and the driver as soon as possible. The judge will consider the level of injuries inflicted upon the victim. Sexual harassment includes lewd conduct, suggestive language, unwarranted sexual advances, and requests for sexual favors. It leads to uncomfortable situations but generally does not enter the physical realm. However, when it does, it becomes sexual assault, which includes groping, assault and battery, kidnapping, inappropriate touching, threats and intimidation, sexual assault and rape, or any use of physical violence or force. A victim can also file a claim against both the driver and Uber. The Uber driver is a person who has committed the acts and can be responsibly liable for his unlawful actions, but the Company can also be complicit if it was negligent in the hiring process or service provision. There is a case of negligence if the driver had a prior conviction of sexual assault or other related crimes and Uber hired him anyway.
The victim of sexual assault in an Uber can collect the following types of damages:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd-susLxV4A
Uber’s rideshare policy isn’t applicable for accidents that take place before a driver accepts a passenger, since Uber considers drivers contractors rather than employees. Consequently, they are not responsible for what happens while the driver isn’t on duty.
Once there is a ride request from a passenger and the driver accepts it, this puts the driver in “on duty” status and Uber’s insurance coverage starts. But in case the driver gets in an accident before he picked up the passenger, it follows that the passenger would have to cancel the ride. This adds a layer of difficulty when claiming the insurance coverage.
The third period is the easiest one to claim insurance coverage from Uber. The passenger is in the Uber car, the driver is “on duty” and the Company must cover whatever happens during this period. Consequently once the driver has been paired with a passenger and after the passenger has entered the Uber car, the company is required to carry a $1 million liability insurance policy. Uber provides its drivers with $1 million of uninsured and underinsured motorist bodily injury coverage. It also provides comprehensive and collision coverage with a $1,000 deductible as long as the driver has collision coverage on his personal auto insurance policy. California law requires the driver to be covered by an auto insurance policy at all times. But since the TNC can help meet that requirement, not all rideshare drivers in California need to purchase rideshare insurance for driving legally. But, the driver may want to purchase an individual rideshare policy which will let to maintain some coverage, such as comprehensive, collision and medical payments, during the First period. Otherwise, the driver would have to pay the costs himself if he is injured or the vehicle is damaged in that period.
It is in your best interest to consult with a Los Angeles Uber accident lawyer about your claim before speaking with Uber or an insurance adjuster. This way you will have more leverage in settlement negotiations with Uber and Uber's insurance adjusters to get the compensation you deserve rather than getting lowball settlement offers. If you or a loved one have been injured in an Uber or Lyft accident we invite you to get in touch with our office. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
[video width="1280" height="720" mp4="https://kaass.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Uber-auto-insurance-coverege.mp4"][/video]