Southern California Injury Lawyer Blog

California Court of Appeals Issues Ruling in Medical Malpractice Wrongful Death Case

March 6, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

The California Court of Appeal for the 2nd District, recently issued an instructive opinion on the area of medical malpractice wrongful death cases.

In the case, Tam v. Garfield Med. Ctr., Inc., Cal. Ct. App., 2nd Dist. (2014), the plaintiff’s father, Mr. Tam, was involved in a serious car accident and suffered severe injuries to his abdomen and shoulder. He was diagnosed in the emergency room department with peritonitis, hypotension, and fluid in the abdomen. Just before he was to undergo emergency surgery, he was given a dose of morphine, which caused his blood pressure to plummet, sending him into cardiac arrest. He then became unconscious and remained in a coma until surgery. After the surgery, he was sent to the intensive care unit to recover, but he remained in a deep coma and died shortly thereafter.

California Court of Appeal Sides with Target in Slip and Fall Ruling

March 3, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

The California Court of Appeals, 2nd District, recently reached a decision in the case of Torres v. Target Corporation, Cal. Ct. App., 2nd Dist. (2014), which demonstrates the base level of proof required in slip and fall personal injury cases.

In the case, the plaintiff slipped and fell in a Target store shortly after the store opened for business. While the plaintiff testified that she felt some sort of unknown item under her sandal that caused her to lose her balance and fall, she could not determine what object made her fall, since there was nothing in the general vicinity once she was able to stand back up.

Regarding a potential source of the purported object, the store had been combed over several times before the time that the incident occurred.

California Court of Appeals Upholds Jury Decision in Low Speed Car Accident Case

February 27, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

The California Court of Appeals decided to uphold a jury verdict awarding a plaintiff $2, 175.27 for medical expenses and no damages for pain and suffering, in a case where she was seeking between $40,000 and $60,000.

The case, Sievers v. Hill, Cal. Ct. App., 3rd Dist. (2014), arose out of an accident when two young women leaving their high school collided. The defendant, Hill, accidentally accelerated her car at a red light, believing that it had turned green, and thus ran into the back of the plaintiff Sievers’ jeep.

Following the verdict, Sievers moved for a new trial, claiming inadequate damages and prejudice from the failure to remove a certain juror. The trial court denied the motion.

California Court of Appeals Upholds $1.25 Million Jury Award in Car Accident Case

February 24, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

The California Court of Appeals (4th District, Division 2) recently rendered an opinion that is instructive on the matter of non-economic damage awards in car accident personal injury cases.

The case, Onley v. Schneider Nat. Carriers, Inc., Cal. Ct. App., 4th Dist. (2014), arose out of a multi-car accident, in which car A was traveling in the far right lane. A tractor-trailer being driven by the defendant tried to pass, side swiping the vehicle, which then spun to the left, crossed in front of the truck, and hit the center divider. A minivan in the far left lane, being driven by Onley, then hit car A.

At trial, a jury found the truck driver liable for the accident, and it also found the driver of car A not liable. The jury designated awards for the occupants of car A and awarded $1,363,579.70 to Onley, and the trial court entered judgment according to those amounts.

California Court of Appeals Upholds Jury Award in Three-Car Accident

February 20, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

The California Court of Appeals recently rendered an opinion concerning a jury award in a car accident case. The opinion, Webster v. Miles, Cal. Ct. App., 5th Dist. (2014), examined the reasonableness of a jury trial that awarded the plaintiff in a car accident case some $9,395 in past economic damages for medical expenses, property damage, and a rental car, and $250 in past non-economic loss. The plaintiff contended that the damages award was inadequate as a matter of law, arguing that, since the jury found that she was injured as a result of the accident, the fact that they only awarded her a partial amount of her medical expenses and a small amount for pain and suffering was improper.

The facts of the accident were as follows. The defendant, Peggy Miles, was driving a Lincoln Continental when she rear-ended the plaintiff’s Chevrolet Malibu, which was stopped at a red light. The impact pushed the plaintiff’s car into a truck stopped in front of her. The damage to the plaintiff’s car was minimal, her air bags did not deploy, and she was able to drive it away from the scene.

The plaintiff was transported via ambulance to a local hospital, as she complained of pain to her head and neck. She was treated with a shot for pain, and after the doctors ran some tests, she was sent home. The plaintiff did not have any visible cuts or bruises following the accident.

California Court of Appeals Upholds Jury Decision in Car Accident Case

February 17, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

A recent Court of Appeals case, Duarte v. Kang, Cal. Ct. App, 2nd Div. (2014), demonstrates the importance of having an experienced trial lawyer when it comes to presenting a complete evidentiary record on appeal in a car accident personal injury case.

The plaintiffs appealed from a judgment following a jury trial in which the jury found in favor of the defendants.The plaintiffs’ argument on appeal was that there was no substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict. The defendants argued that the plaintiffs failed to bring up an adequate record in support of their claim of error.

The appeal arose out of a car accident, in which the plaintiffs sustained personal injuries. The plaintiffs alleged that they were involved in a two-car accident that took place in a signal-controlled intersection, and that the defendant Kang was the driver of the other car. The plaintiffs allege that the signal had turned red, and that they were lawfully exiting the intersection, when Kang unlawfully entered the intersection on a red light and crashed into them. At trial, the defendant driver claimed that she entered the intersection on a yellow light and that the plaintiffs illegally turned in front of her, failing to yield to her right of way.

California Court of Appeal Sides with Insurer in High Speed Car Accident Case

February 13, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

The California Court of Appeals, for the 4th District, recently issued an opinion in a car accident case that sheds some light of the conception of what a “single accident” means for purposes of car insurance policy limits.

In the case, Mercury Casualty Co.v. Jones, Cal. Ct. App., 4th Dist. (2014), the plaintiff was involved in a serious car accident. The parties agreed that the following things were accurate. The car involved in the accident was owned by Kari Amaya, and she had an insurance policy with Mercury, which had bodily injury liability limits of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per accident. Ashley Amaya was listed as an insured driver.

California Court of Appeals Sides With Hospital in Fall Case

February 10, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

The California Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently issued an opinion that is instructive in several personal injury legal doctrines in California: negligence, professional negligence, and the Elder Abuse Act.

In the case, Worsham v. O’Connor Hospital, 226 Cal.App.4th 331 (2014), Ms. Worsham entered a hospital to undergo hip surgery to treat a fractured hip she suffered as a result of falling in her home. Following the surgery, she was discharged to O’Connor’s Transitional Care unit, where, due to alleged lack of supervision, she fell and broke her right arm and re-broke her hip.

Federal Court Clarifies Meaning of Use for Terms of Insurance Coverage in California Car Accident Case

February 6, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently rendered an opinion in Encompass Ins. Co. v. Coast Nat’l., et al., No. 12-55784 (9th Cir. 2014), which is instructive on the matter of what constitutes the use of a vehicle for the purposes of California insurance law.

In the case, a woman was a passenger in a vehicle, car A, being driven by a man. The man lost control of his vehicle, the car ran off the road, and it crashed into a light pole. A second car, not involved in the accident, stopped at the scene to help. A woman who was a passenger in that second car saw the first woman inside the crashed car and feared that she might be in danger. She testified that the car was smoking and leaking fluid, which led her to believe the car might catch fire or explode. She physically removed the woman from the wrecked car. Following the car accident, the woman suffered severe spinal injuries and became paraplegic. The woman sued the woman who removed her, claiming that she caused the injuries when she removed her from the wrecked car.

California Court of Appeals Issues Ruling in Multi-Car Collision Lawsuit

February 3, 2015 | Sharifi Firm, APC

The California Court of Appeals recently reached a decision in Romine v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 224 Cal. App. 4th 990 (2014), regarding a violent multi-car accident that resulted in leaving the individual who brought the lawsuit quadriplegic.

The lawsuit arose out of a several-car collision, which was caused by one car, a Mustang, exiting the freeway at a speed of 70-86 miles per hour and crashing into one car, forcing it into the one in front of it, and so forth. The Mustang crashed into an Altima, which then crashed into a Frontier (the plaintiff’s car), which then crashed into a Mercedes, which then crashed into a Volvo, until all of the cars came to rest in the intersection.