Understanding What Makes an Accident Lawyer Stand Out

The legal landscape in Los Angeles is saturated with personal injury attorneys, but not all possess the same level of expertise, resources, or commitment to client success. A truly exceptional accident lawyer combines legal knowledge with practical experience handling cases similar to yours.

Track Record and Case Results

When evaluating potential attorneys, examine their history of verdicts and settlements. The best accident lawyer Los Angeles residents can choose should demonstrate consistent success in securing favorable outcomes. Look for specific case results in categories matching your situation, whether that’s car accidents, pedestrian injuries, or motorcycle collisions.

Key performance indicators include:

• Settlement amounts obtained for clients
• Trial verdicts won against insurance companies
• Success rate in negotiating fair compensation
• Years of experience handling accident cases
• Number of cases successfully resolved

A lawyer’s reputation among peers and in the legal community also provides valuable insight. Recognition from professional organizations, peer reviews, and client testimonials paint a comprehensive picture of their capabilities.

Specialization in Accident and Injury Law

General practice attorneys may handle accident cases, but specialists dedicated to personal injury law bring deeper expertise. The legal nuances of accident claims require specific knowledge of California vehicle codes, insurance regulations, and personal injury statutes. When searching for the best accident lawyer Los Angeles offers, prioritize those who focus exclusively or primarily on accident and injury cases.

California’s comparative negligence laws, statute of limitations requirements, and insurance minimum coverage standards all impact your claim. An attorney who regularly navigates these legal frameworks will better protect your interests than someone who occasionally handles injury cases between other practice areas.

Critical Qualifications to Verify

Before committing to legal representation, verify credentials and qualifications that distinguish superior attorneys from average ones. This due diligence protects you from inexperienced or unethical practitioners while identifying genuinely skilled advocates.

Licensing and Bar Association Membership

Every attorney practicing in California must maintain an active State Bar license. You can verify standing through the State Bar of California’s online directory. Beyond basic licensing, membership in professional organizations demonstrates commitment to ongoing education and ethical practice. Resources like the Los Angeles County Bar Association provide referral services and maintain standards for member attorneys.

Insurance and Malpractice Coverage

Professional liability insurance protects clients if an attorney makes errors that damage your case. While California doesn’t require attorneys to carry malpractice insurance, the best accident lawyer Los Angeles can provide should maintain adequate coverage. This demonstrates financial responsibility and provides recourse if professional mistakes occur.

Evaluating Communication and Client Service

Legal expertise means little if you can’t effectively communicate with your attorney. The attorney-client relationship requires clear, consistent communication throughout your case, which may span months or even years.

Accessibility and Responsiveness

Top-tier accident lawyers balance heavy caseloads with individual client attention. During initial consultations, observe how quickly they respond to inquiries and how thoroughly they explain legal concepts. You deserve an attorney who makes you feel heard and prioritized, not just another case number.

Questions to assess communication quality:

1. How quickly does the attorney or their staff return calls?
2. Will you work directly with the attorney or primarily with paralegals?
3. How often will you receive case updates?
4. What communication methods do they prefer (phone, email, portal)?
5. Do they explain legal terms in understandable language?

Many injury victims benefit from understanding the personal injury claim process before selecting representation. This knowledge helps you ask informed questions and evaluate attorney responses.

Fee Structures and Financial Transparency

Most accident lawyers work on contingency fees, meaning they collect payment only when you receive compensation. The standard contingency fee in California ranges from 33% to 40% of your settlement or verdict. However, fee arrangements vary, and understanding all costs upfront prevents unpleasant surprises.

The best accident lawyer Los Angeles has available will provide clear, written fee agreements explaining:

• Contingency percentage at different case stages
• Additional costs you may incur (filing fees, expert witnesses, medical records)
• How expenses are deducted from settlements
• What happens if your case doesn’t succeed

Resources and Firm Capabilities

Individual attorney skill matters enormously, but the resources backing that attorney significantly impact case outcomes. Large, complex accident cases require substantial investment in investigation, expert testimony, and litigation preparation.

Investigation and Expert Networks

Building a compelling accident case requires thorough investigation beyond police reports. Top law firms employ or contract with accident reconstruction specialists, medical experts, economists, and vocational rehabilitation consultants. These professionals provide testimony and evidence that strengthen your claim.

When interviewing potential attorneys, ask about their investigative capabilities. Do they visit accident scenes? Do they maintain relationships with expert witnesses in relevant fields? Can they afford to advance case costs without requiring upfront payment from you?

Trial Experience and Willingness

While most personal injury cases settle before trial, insurance companies offer better settlements when they know your attorney will competently litigate if necessary. Some lawyers avoid trials, quickly accepting inadequate settlements to close cases faster. The best accident lawyer Los Angeles residents hire should have substantial trial experience and willingness to fight for fair compensation in court.

According to The Insurance Information Institute’s guidance on post-accident actions, proper documentation and legal representation significantly impact claim outcomes. An attorney prepared to take your case to trial demonstrates commitment to maximizing your recovery.

Matching Attorney Expertise to Your Accident Type

Different accident categories present unique legal challenges. While a competent personal injury attorney can handle various accident types, some develop particular expertise in specific areas.

Vehicle Accident Specializations

Los Angeles traffic creates diverse accident scenarios, each with distinct legal considerations:

• Multi-vehicle collisions: Require determining liability among multiple parties
• Pedestrian accidents: Involve vulnerable victim protection laws
• Motorcycle crashes: Face bias assumptions requiring strong evidence
• Commercial vehicle accidents: Engage federal regulations and corporate defendants
• Rideshare incidents: Navigate complex insurance coverage layers

For guidance on selecting attorneys for specific accident types, resources like choosing a pedestrian accident lawyer provide specialized selection criteria. Similarly, understanding car accident lawyer selection essentials helps you identify qualified counsel.

Severity and Complexity Considerations

Minor fender-benders with soft tissue injuries differ dramatically from catastrophic accidents causing permanent disability. The best accident lawyer Los Angeles can recommend for severe injuries should have experience handling:

1. Traumatic brain injuries
2. Spinal cord damage and paralysis
3. Multiple bone fractures requiring surgery
4. Burn injuries
5. Wrongful death claims

These cases demand attorneys who understand long-term medical care costs, life care planning, and maximum compensation valuation.

Red Flags to Avoid in Attorney Selection

Certain warning signs indicate attorneys you should avoid, regardless of their marketing or promises.

Unrealistic Guarantees and Promises

No ethical attorney can guarantee specific settlement amounts or case outcomes. Laws prohibit such guarantees, and circumstances beyond attorney control affect results. Be skeptical of lawyers who promise exact compensation figures or guaranteed victories during initial consultations.

Warning signs of problematic attorneys:

• Pressure to sign retainer agreements immediately
• Guaranteed settlement amounts
• Requests for upfront fees in contingency cases
• Unwillingness to explain fee structures clearly
• Poor online reviews mentioning communication problems
• Disciplinary actions visible in Bar records

High-Pressure Sales Tactics

Reputable attorneys educate potential clients and allow them time to make informed decisions. Aggressive sales tactics, immediate signing pressure, or disparaging comments about other lawyers suggest priorities other than your best interests.

Leveraging Consultations Effectively

Most accident lawyers offer free initial consultations. These meetings provide opportunities to evaluate compatibility, ask questions, and understand your legal options.

Preparation for Your Consultation

Maximize consultation value by arriving prepared with relevant documentation and thoughtful questions. Bring accident reports, medical records, insurance correspondence, and photographs if available.

Questions should cover fee arrangements, case timeline expectations, potential challenges, and the attorney’s specific experience with cases like yours. Understanding average car accident settlements in Los Angeles provides context for realistic compensation discussions.

Comparing Multiple Attorneys

Interview at least three qualified attorneys before making your decision. This comparison reveals different approaches, fee structures, and personality fits. The best accident lawyer Los Angeles offers for your situation balances legal expertise with communication style and commitment to your specific needs.

Take notes during consultations to aid later comparison. Pay attention to how thoroughly attorneys answer questions and whether they demonstrate genuine interest in your case particulars rather than generic responses.

Geographic and Jurisdictional Considerations

While California maintains statewide legal standards, local court familiarity and geographic availability matter in personal injury cases.

Local Court Knowledge

Attorneys practicing primarily in Los Angeles County understand local court procedures, judge preferences, and jury tendencies. This knowledge influences case strategy and settlement negotiations. Insurance companies recognize locally-established attorneys and often offer better settlements to avoid litigation against known trial lawyers.

When selecting representation, consider whether the attorney regularly practices in the court jurisdiction where your case would be filed. Los Angeles County’s Superior Court system operates differently from surrounding counties, and local expertise provides advantages.

Accessibility for In-Person Meetings

While technology enables remote communication, some situations require face-to-face meetings. Choose an attorney with accessible offices for consultations, document signing, and trial preparation meetings. Convenience matters when you’re recovering from injuries and managing medical appointments.

Ongoing Professional Development and Reputation

The legal field constantly evolves with new precedents, regulations, and strategies. Elite attorneys invest in continuing education and professional development.

Industry Recognition and Awards

Professional recognition from organizations like the American Association for Justice, Super Lawyers, or local bar associations indicates peer respect and achievement. While awards alone don’t guarantee quality, they suggest dedication to excellence and professional standing.

Review attorney profiles for speaking engagements, published articles, or teaching positions. These activities demonstrate thought leadership and commitment to advancing the profession. Resources highlighting top accident attorneys in 2026 can provide perspective on industry-recognized professionals.

Client Reviews and Testimonials

Online reviews from former clients offer unfiltered perspectives on attorney performance. While no lawyer pleases every client, patterns in reviews reveal strengths and weaknesses. Look for comments about communication, results obtained, professionalism, and overall satisfaction.

Balance online reviews with professional credentials and your personal consultation experience. Some excellent attorneys maintain low online profiles, while marketing-focused firms may generate numerous reviews through aggressive solicitation.

Insurance Company Relationships and Negotiation Strength

Your attorney’s reputation with insurance companies directly affects settlement negotiations. Insurers track which attorneys settle quickly for low amounts versus those who build strong cases and win trials.

Leverage Through Litigation Willingness

The best accident lawyer Los Angeles provides brings leverage to negotiations through proven willingness to litigate. Insurance adjusters offer better settlements when facing attorneys with successful trial records. This reputation develops over years of consistent case preparation and courtroom victories.

Ask potential attorneys about their settlement-to-trial ratio and why they settle or litigate cases. While trials cost time and money, attorneys should demonstrate strategic decision-making based on client interests rather than convenience.

Understanding Insurance Defense Tactics

Experienced personal injury attorneys anticipate insurance company strategies to minimize payouts. Common tactics include delayed responses, lowball initial offers, questioning injury severity, and attributing fault to accident victims. Your attorney should recognize these approaches and counter them effectively.

Knowledge of specific insurance companies’ patterns also helps. Different carriers employ distinct claim-handling philosophies, and attorneys familiar with these patterns negotiate more effectively.

Making Your Final Decision

After researching qualifications, conducting consultations, and comparing options, trust your judgment when selecting representation. The attorney-client relationship requires mutual respect, clear communication, and shared commitment to your case goals.

Trust and Comfort Level

Beyond credentials and experience, consider your comfort level with each attorney. You’ll share sensitive medical information, financial details, and personal concerns throughout your case. Choose someone who demonstrates empathy, listens carefully, and respects your input on case decisions.

The best accident lawyer Los Angeles has available combines legal excellence with genuine client care. This balance ensures not only strong legal representation but also a supportive relationship during a challenging time.

Written Agreements and Next Steps

Once you select an attorney, review the retainer agreement carefully before signing. This document should clearly specify fee percentages, expense handling, communication expectations, and case responsibilities. Don’t hesitate to ask questions about any unclear provisions.

After signing, your attorney should outline immediate next steps, timeline expectations, and required actions from you. Clear initial direction establishes productive collaboration and prevents misunderstandings as your case progresses.

The Value of Specialized Personal Injury Focus

General practice attorneys handle diverse legal matters from real estate to criminal defense, spreading their expertise across multiple specialties. In contrast, dedicated personal injury firms concentrate resources and knowledge on accident and injury cases exclusively.

This specialization creates several advantages for clients. Attorneys develop deeper understanding of injury valuation, medical terminology, and rehabilitation requirements. They maintain updated knowledge of personal injury case law and insurance industry practices. Their staff, from paralegals to investigators, brings specialized skills specific to accident cases.

When evaluating your options for the best accident lawyer Los Angeles can provide, consider whether you want a specialist dedicated to injury law or a generalist handling your case among varied legal matters. For most serious accidents, specialized focus delivers superior results through concentrated expertise and resources.

Firms like Steven M Sweat, Personal Injury Lawyers, APC exemplify this specialized approach, focusing exclusively on representing injury victims throughout California. This dedication allows development of refined strategies, extensive expert networks, and deep knowledge specific to personal injury litigation.

Selecting the best accident lawyer Los Angeles offers requires careful evaluation of credentials, experience, communication style, and resources. The right attorney combines legal expertise with genuine commitment to your recovery and fair compensation. Whether you’ve experienced a minor collision or catastrophic injury, professional legal representation protects your rights and maximizes your claim value. Steven M Sweat, Personal Injury Lawyers, APC provides experienced personal injury representation throughout Los Angeles, offering free case evaluations to help accident victims understand their legal options and pursue the compensation they deserve.

In today’s fast-paced world, distractions seem to be lurking around every corner. From smartphones to GPS devices, there’s no shortage of attention-stealing gadgets that demand our focus while we’re on the road. Unfortunately, the consequences of distracted driving can be devastating, leading to accidents, injuries, and even loss of life. In this blog post, we’ll shed light on the alarming reality of distracted driving and discuss the importance of staying focused behind the wheel.

1. Defining Distracted Driving:

Distracted driving refers to any activity that diverts a driver’s attention away from the primary task of operating a vehicle. It can be categorized into three main types: visual distractions (taking your eyes off the road), manual distractions (taking your hands off the wheel), and cognitive distractions (taking your mind off driving). Common examples include texting, talking on the phone, eating or drinking, adjusting music, using navigation systems, grooming, and even daydreaming.

2. The Growing Problem:

Distracted driving has become an epidemic on our roads. The widespread use of smartphones and the increasing integration of technology in vehicles have exacerbated the problem. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in the United States alone, distracted driving claimed 3,142 lives in 2019. It’s a problem that affects all age groups, but particularly younger drivers, who are more prone to using their phones while driving.

3. The Impact of Distractions:

The consequences of distracted driving can be catastrophic. When drivers take their eyes off the road for just a few seconds, they significantly increase the risk of a collision. Research shows that texting while driving is particularly dangerous, as it combines all three types of distractions. Texting drivers are 23 times more likely to be involved in a crash than those who are focused on the road. Additionally, distracted driving reduces reaction times, impairs judgment, and compromises the ability to handle unexpected situations.

4. Combating Distracted Driving:

Raising awareness about the dangers of distracted driving is crucial in curbing this hazardous behavior. Educational campaigns, public service announcements, and stricter legislation can play a significant role in changing attitudes and behaviors. Moreover, technological advancements can also provide solutions. For example, hands-free systems, voice commands, and improved infotainment interfaces in vehicles can reduce manual distractions. Additionally, smartphone apps that disable notifications while driving can help prevent the temptation to use the phone.

5. Taking Personal Responsibility:

While society and technology can contribute to mitigating distracted driving, the ultimate responsibility lies with each individual driver. We must recognize that no text message, call, or notification is worth risking our lives or the lives of others. It is essential to prioritize safety by adopting good habits such as putting phones on silent or in a secure location, planning routes in advance, and avoiding multitasking while driving.

California Legal Prohibitions Related to Distracted Driving

1. CVC Section 23123(a): Prohibits drivers from using a handheld wireless telephone while operating a motor vehicle, unless it is mounted on a dashboard or windshield and used in a hands-free manner.
2. CVC Section 23123.5: Prohibits drivers under the age of 18 from using any electronic device, including cell phones, while operating a motor vehicle, even if it is equipped with a hands-free feature.
3. CVC Section 23124: Prohibits school bus drivers from using a cell phone while driving, unless it is necessary for an emergency.
4. CVC Section 23125: Prohibits texting, emailing, or using any other electronic device to write, send, or read text-based communication while operating a motor vehicle.
5. CVC Section 27602: Prohibits holding a cell phone or other electronic wireless communication device while driving, unless it is mounted on a dashboard or windshield and used in a hands-free manner.

Retain An Attorney if You or a Loved One are the Victim of Distracted Driving Causing Injury or Death

Distracted driving is a serious issue that can result in devastating consequences, including injuries and loss of life. If you or a loved one have been affected by a distracted driving incident, it is essential to understand your legal rights and options. In this blog post, we will explore why retaining an attorney is crucial in seeking justice and compensation for victims of distracted driving accidents.

1. Understanding the Legal Landscape:

Navigating the legal complexities surrounding distracted driving accidents can be challenging, especially when dealing with physical, emotional, and financial hardships. An experienced attorney specializing in personal injury or wrongful death cases related to distracted driving can provide valuable guidance and support. They possess the knowledge and expertise necessary to navigate the legal system, ensuring your rights are protected.

2. Determining Liability:

Proving liability is a crucial aspect of any personal injury or wrongful death claim. An attorney will investigate the circumstances surrounding the accident, gather evidence, and establish negligence on the part of the distracted driver. They will examine factors such as cell phone records, witness statements, police reports, and any available video footage to build a strong case on your behalf.

3. Maximizing Compensation:

In the aftermath of a distracted driving accident, victims and their families often face substantial medical expenses, lost wages, and emotional trauma. An attorney will work diligently to calculate the full extent of your damages, including past and future medical bills, rehabilitation costs, lost income, pain and suffering, and other applicable losses. They will negotiate with insurance companies and, if necessary, litigate in court to pursue the maximum compensation you deserve.

4. Dealing with Insurance Companies:

Insurance companies are known for employing tactics to minimize payouts and protect their bottom line. Having an attorney by your side levels the playing field. They understand the strategies insurance companies use and will advocate for your best interests. Your attorney will handle all communication with insurance adjusters, ensuring your rights are protected, and you are not taken advantage of during the claims process.

5. Advocacy and Peace of Mind:

Being involved in a distracted driving accident can be overwhelming, emotionally draining, and stressful. An attorney will serve as your advocate, providing compassionate support throughout the legal proceedings. They will handle the intricate legal matters on your behalf, allowing you to focus on healing and rebuilding your life. By entrusting your case to a skilled attorney, you gain peace of mind, knowing that someone is fighting for your rights and seeking justice on your behalf.

Conclusion:

If you or a loved one have suffered injuries or lost a loved one due to a distracted driving accident, seeking legal representation is crucial. Retaining an attorney specializing in personal injury or wrongful death cases related to distracted driving can make a significant difference in the outcome of your case. They will guide you through the legal process, protect your rights, and work tirelessly to secure the compensation you deserve. Remember, you do not have to face the aftermath of a distracted driving accident alone. Reach out to an experienced attorney who can help you navigate this challenging time and seek the justice you deserve.

According to the data compiled by the City of Los Angeles based upon Traffic Collision Reports made in relation to auto accidents city-wide from 2010 to the present, the following are the most dangerous roads in L.A.

• Western Avenue – 7817 Traffic Collisions
• Ventura Boulevard – 7012 Traffic Incidents
• Sherman Way – 6969 Traffic Accidents
• Sepulveda Boulevard – 6,640 Crashes
• Vermont Avenue – 6,407 Wrecks
• Victory Boulevard – 6,087 Traffic Accidents
• Sunset Boulevard – 5,957 Traffic Collisions
• Figueroa Street – 5,861 Accidents
• Roscoe Blvd. – 5,375 Mishaps
• Vanowen Street – 5,072

This represents the top 10 but there are numerous other roadways in Los Angeles with a high number of traffic incidents including the following: Olympic Blvd., Pico Blvd., Normandy, Wilshire, and Venice.

What do these statistics tell us about Los Angeles traffic accidents?

First it should be noted that many traffic accidents in Los Angeles don’t result in a Traffic Collision Report so the numbers above are probably much higher. Technically, a Traffic Collision Report is supposed to be made any time there is personal injury involved in a car accident. Often, the LAPD refuses to even come out the the accident scene even if one of the drivers or passengers claims to be injured.

Second, it is notable that all of the streets named above are major thoroughfares either through the City of L.A or the San Fernando Valley prone to traffic especially during rush hour. High traffic volume naturally leads to a higher percentage of accidents. In addition, many of the streets named above have numerous crosswalks and some have bike lanes. Pedestrian and bicycle traffic mixing with motor vehicles is also a scenario prone to pedestrian and bike accidents.

Finally, these roadways all have major intersections. Intersections are the most common area for major traffic collisions like running red lights, not looking for pedestrians or bicycles in crosswalks, left hand turns in front of oncoming traffic and other same or similar mishaps.

Importance of Hiring An Experienced Los Angeles Car Accident Attorney

If you have been injured in a traffic accident in Los Angeles, you may be entitled to compensation for your injuries, lost wages, and other damages. To file a claim, you will need to contact an experienced personal injury attorney who is familiar with the process and can help you navigate the legal system. Your attorney will work to ensure that you are compensated for medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and any other damages you may be entitled to. Additionally, they will help you determine who was at fault and negotiate with the insurance company on your behalf. It is important to remember that the insurance company is not on your side and may try to lowball your settlement offer. An experienced attorney will help you get the full compensation you deserve.

Sources

Los Angeles City Traffic Collision Data: https://data.lacity.org/Public-Safety/Traffic-Collision-Data-from-2010-to-Present/d5tf-ez2w

In 2019, Amazon.com Inc. surpassed Walmart Inc. to become the world’s largest retailer. During the fiscal year 2020, the behemoth grossed more than $386 billion in sales. A driver of the company’s success is how it simplifies online purchases by streamlining delivery logistics. Amazon’s customers return again and again because of their easy access to countless products and fast delivery services.

Based in Seattle, Washington, Amazon has warehouses stationed throughout the U.S. and the world. The company uses multiple carriers to transport and deliver packages to its customers. Amazon has multiple distribution centers throughout California with more centers planned. In cities throughout the state, local delivery companies are contracted to pick up and deliver goods to people at commercial and residential addresses. By using third-party delivery companies, Amazon has been able to offer fast turnaround times on its customers’ orders.

The Amazon Flex delivery program also allows independent drivers in the greater Los Angeles area and other cities across California to pick up and deliver Amazon Prime orders to customers. Each driver must wear uniforms, use on-road technology, complete safety training courses, and follow other company policies. However, drivers who drive through the Flex program are independent contractors instead of employees, so they do not receive benefits.

Amazon delivery workers who are injured while working might be eligible for workers’ compensation benefits and could also have grounds to file third-party personal injury lawsuits. The laws for Amazon delivery workers are complex, and it is critical to work with an experienced personal injury attorney to help you recover all of the compensation you deserve. The attorneys at the Steven M. Sweat Personal Injury Lawyers are prepared to help you pursue compensation in your case.

Work injury risks for Amazon delivery workers

Each day, Amazon delivery services workers face multiple risks. Some of the risks faced by delivery workers include motor vehicle accidents, dog bites, slip-and-fall accidents, robberies, and others. Delivery workers can also suffer work-related injuries caused by repetitive movements, lifting heavy boxes, and others that can result in chronic back injuries, sprains, and strains.

People who work through the Amazon Flex app have to drive to a large variety of different addresses and often have to park in congested areas to deliver packages. Since the drivers spend a substantial amount of time on the road, their chances of being involved in accidents are higher. Delivery drivers also face time pressures and might rush from delivery location to location to try to meet their deadlines. Since Amazon prioritizes productivity, this can lead to driver fatigue and an increased risk of accidents and injuries.

Eligibility for Workers’ Compensation

Delivery workers who are directly employed by Amazon and are not independent contractors are covered under California’s workers’ compensation laws. Employers in the state, including Amazon, must carry workers’ compensation insurance to cover their employees’ work-related injuries and occupational illnesses. Amazon delivery employees who are injured on the job may file claims for benefits with their employer’s workers’ compensation insurance coverage. If you are employed by Amazon and are injured, you will not have to prove that the company was negligent to recover workers’ compensation benefits. This type of coverage can provide benefits to pay for your medical expenses, medications, surgery, rehabilitation expenses, and a portion of your income losses if you are temporarily or permanently unable to return to your work because of your injuries.

If you are an Amazon Flex driver who is injured at work, you are not considered to be an employee. As an independent contractor, you cannot receive workers’ compensation benefits for your injuries. However, voters in California passed Proposition 22 on Nov. 3, 2020, which went into effect on Jan. 1, 2021. Under this law, driver app companies, including Uber, Door Dash, Lyft, Amazon Flex, and others must provide occupational insurance for their drivers while they are driving with their apps on that provides up to $1 million in coverage for accident-related injuries. This insurance also pays for up to 66% of the average wages earned by the drivers over the past month across all of the driving apps the worker uses. If you are injured in an accident while driving for Amazon Flex, an experienced injury attorney can help you to file your claim to recover the benefits you deserve.

Third-party personal injury lawsuits for Amazon delivery accidents

Amazon delivery drivers who are injured in accidents while working may also have the ability to pursue compensation through third-party personal injury lawsuits. When another driver or other third party negligently causes an accident, the delivery driver can file a lawsuit against the third party or driver to recover compensation for his or her losses.

If you are an Amazon employee who works in a fulfillment center, you can also file a workers’ compensation claim through Amazon’s workers’ compensation coverage. For example, if you are injured in a slip-and-fall accident while gathering packages to fulfill an order within the distribution center, you can file a workers’ compensation claim with Amazon. If you are a Flex driver who is injured in an accident while delivering packages, you could also file a claim with the company’s occupational liability insurance required by Proposition 22 while filing a third-party claim against the person or company responsible for causing your accident.

For example, if another driver hits your car while you are fulfilling orders for Amazon, you might be entitled to pursue compensation against the negligent driver by filing a personal injury claim against him or her. The benefit of being able to file a third-party personal injury claim in addition to a worker’s compensation or occupational liability claim through Amazon is that you can seek to recover damages for your non-economic losses through a personal injury lawsuit. These types of damages are not available through a workers’ compensation or occupational liability insurance claim through Amazon itself.

Damages for your non-economic losses include compensation for the pain and suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement, and other losses you might have suffered because of your accident. While a workers’ comp claim might replace a percentage of your lost wages, a personal injury claim might pay for all of the income you have lost as well as the income you will likely lose in the future because of your injuries.

Third-party personal injury claims frequently involve complex liability issues. Various factors may complicate the process of determining fault, including the available insurance coverage, the circumstances surrounding the accident, what happened in the moments leading up to the collision, the status of the worker, and others. An experienced injury attorney can help to explain the legal options available to you for recovering compensation for your losses following your work-related accident.

Steps to take following an Amazon delivery worker accident

Whether you were injured while working in an Amazon fulfillment center or while delivering packages as an Amazon Flex driver, you should follow specific steps to protect your rights to recover compensation. These steps include the following:

• If you are in a vehicle accident, call 911 to report it and get help.
• If you were injured in a slip-and-fall or equipment accident, report what happened to your supervisor immediately.
• Submit a detailed accident report stating exactly what occurred.
• Gather important documents about your accident and injuries, including medical records and police reports.
• If you had a vehicle accident, take photographs of the damage to both vehicles and the accident scene.
• Get the other driver’s contact, insurance, and registration information.
• Get the names and contact information of anyone who saw your accident.
• Get immediate medical attention.
• Schedule a consultation with an experienced Amazon worker injury lawyer.

Get help from the law firm of Steven M. Sweat Personal Injury Lawyers today

If you have been injured while working as an Amazon delivery worker in Los Angeles, you should contact the law firm of Steven M. Sweat Personal Injury Lawyers as soon as possible. Trying to deal with a vast corporation like Amazon without legal help can be difficult. Our attorneys can help you to identify all of the potential sources of recovery to help you maximize the amount of compensation you might recover. Call us today for a free consultation at 866.966.5240.

Accidental shootings because of improperly stored guns are a major problem in California and the U.S. When another person is visiting a home with guns that are not properly stored, a person who suffers a gun injury because of the negligence of the homeowner in failing to secure the guns may have grounds to recover compensation for his or her resulting losses. While homeowners have a duty of care to take reasonable steps to prevent visitors from being injured, there is a question of whether a third party who has some degree of control over the premises might also be liable for injuries resulting from the third party’s negligence. In Hernandez v. Jensen, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. 294449, the California Court of Appeals considered a case in which an adult daughter failed to make sure her father’s guns were properly stored and secured to determine whether she could be held liable when a home health aide was accidentally shot by a falling, loaded rifle in a closet.[1]

Factual and procedural background

Maria Jensen hired two health care aides to care for her 87-year-old parents in their home in Commerce, California from Gerinet, Inc. Ms. Jensen’s elderly mother had dementia, and her father was no longer able to care for her. When Jensen signed a contract for home health aides with Gerinet, the contract stated that she agreed to provide a safe home for the aides to work in. While the first aide was hired to provide direct health care assistance to her mother, the second aide was hired to provide basic health care assistance, prepare meals for Jensen’s parents, and perform light housekeeping work. Jensen also paid to install surveillance cameras in her parents’ home because of recent break-ins in the area. Jensen used the cameras to monitor the aides’ work and to check in on her parents.

On Feb. 16, 2015, Jensen’s father told the aides that he was short of breath. One aide, Tanya Duran, went to get his oxygen tank from a closet where it was stored. The second aide, Annet Hernandez, was assisting Jensen’s mother with bathing at the time. When Duran reached into the closet to retrieve the oxygen tank, a loaded shotgun fell, causing it to fire and shoot Hernandez in the bathroom.

Duran called 911. Hernandez sustained serious injuries, including a pelvic fracture and a perforated intestine. The police seized the shotgun, a loaded handgun, and a BB gun from the elder Jensens’ closet. Duran called Jensen to report what happened. Instead of asking how Hernandez was doing, Jensen instead cursed at Duran and demanded to know why she had gotten into the closet. The police found that the shooting was accidental. However, the guns had not been properly secured or stored.

Hernandez filed a lawsuit against Jensen, her father, her mother’s estate, her brother, and her other two siblings for negligence and premises liability. Jensen testified that she and her siblings knew that her father kept guns in his home. She said that she did not know that he stored a rifle in his closet. Her sister testified that she knew that her father kept a handgun in the nightstand but did not know about the rifle in the closet. Jensen’s brother testified that he knew the rifle was in the closet but had not told his sisters. Jensen’s father did not have a gun safe in the home to properly store and secure any of the guns.

After the shooting, Gerinet told the Jensens that they would need to remove all guns from the home before any home health work would be provided. While looking through her parents’ home to check for guns, Jensen found two more rifles in the same closet.

The case went to a jury trial. The jury issued a verdict in Hernandez’s favor in the amount of $3.61 million. The jury found that Jensen was 60% at fault, her brother was 20% at fault, and her father was 15% at fault. The economic damages award was reduced by the court from $610,000 to $406,644.44. The judge left the $3 million non-economic damages as awarded. Jensen filed an appeal.

Issue: Whether Jensen owed a duty of care to Hernandez?

On appeal, Jensen argued that she should not have been found liable for the injuries caused to Hernandez because she did not owe her a duty of care and was not responsible for the harm she suffered. Hernandez argued that Jensen did owe Hernandez a duty. When she signed the contract with Gerinet, she agreed that her parents’ home would be safe. By failing to ensure that her father’s guns were removed or stored safely in a locked gun cabinet, Hernandez argued that Jensen did owe her a duty of care, violated it, and was responsible for the injuries she suffered as a result of being shot.

Rule: To prove a negligence claim, a plaintiff must show that the defendant owed a legal duty, breached the duty that was owed, caused the plaintiff’s injuries, and the plaintiff suffered actual harm as a result.

Jensen argued that she could not have owed a legal duty of care to Hernandez under a premises liability negligence claim because she did not own her parents’ home.[2] She argued that the trial court erred by not instructing the jury that ownership, control, or maintenance of the property was a prerequisite to a finding of general liability.

Analysis

The court began by analyzing the duty element. It began by noting that under Cal. Civ. Code § 1714, every person is responsible for both his or her willful actions as well as any injuries suffered by others because of a lack of ordinary care in managing his or her property.[3] The court also stated that every person has a general duty to exercise reasonable care to protect the safety of others. The court noted that when public policy dictates a reason for departing from the standard outlined in Cal. Civ. Code § 1714, the courts apply the factors outlined in Rowland v. Christian, 69 Cal. 2d. 108 (1968) to determine whether the departure is justified.[4]

One of the Rowland factors is the foreseeability of the harm. The injury that results from the negligent act must be reasonably foreseeable. The court found that was reasonably foreseeable that a home health aide working in a home with loaded, unsecured guns might be accidentally shot.[5] It also found that the harm caused to Hernandez was connected to Jensen’s failure to ensure the guns in her parents’ home were secured.

The court found that Jensen knew that her parents had guns in the home and that people with guns have a duty of care to keep them secured and store them safely. It also found that there was a causal connection between Jensen’s failure to check for guns and ensure that they were properly secured and Hernandez’s injury. Finally, the court found that the instructions provided by the judge to the jury were proper.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the verdict and the findings of the trial court. Hernandez was awarded her costs on appeal.

Talk to a Los Angeles attorney at the Steven M. Sweat Personal Injury Lawyers

If you have suffered injuries while working in someone else’s home because of the negligence of the homeowner or someone else who controlled the property, you may have legal rights to pursue damages. Contact an experienced Los Angeles personal injury attorney at the Steven M. Sweat Personal Injury Lawyers by calling us at 866.966.5240.

Sources

[1] https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2021/b294449.html?utm_source=summary-newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2021-03-19-personal-injury-808a161a33&utm_content=text-case-title-3

[2] https://www.victimslawyer.com/premises-liability.html

[3] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=1714.&lawCode=CIV

[4] http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13675261667224866941&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

[5] https://www.victimslawyer.com/california-child-gun-injury-death-lawyer.html

In California, landlords owe a duty of care to their tenants to correct hazards that they know about or reasonably should discover on their property. However, this duty does not extend to hazards created by the tenants that the landlords do not know about and could not have reasonably discovered. In Lin Joon Oh v. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Assn. of America, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. B297567, the court considered a case involving a tenant’s handling and storage of hazardous chemicals on its leased premises and whether the landlord was liable to pay damages.

Factual and procedural background

Ji Hoon Oh was employed by I.B.S. Beauty Co., which leased the property from Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America. The property was managed by Cushman & Wakefield Management Corporation and consisted of part of a building in an industrial complex in Santa Fe Springs, California. IBS initially leased the property from TIAA in Oct. 2017 and subsequently renewed the lease multiple times. The last renewal of the lease occurred in Oct. 2015. IBS sold a hair product called MOA Oil and stored it in 55-gallon drums in the facility. The drums did not have markings to indicate that the chemicals were hazardous or volatile.

On March 2, 2016, Oh was pouring MOA Oil from one of the drums into smaller containers when it exploded, causing a fire that engulfed Oh and the facility. Oh was killed, and his parents filed a lawsuit against TIAA, Cushman & Wakefield, and others, alleging causes of action for negligence, negligence per se, and wrongful death. IBS was unaware that the MOA Oil was volatile until after the explosion. TIAA and Cushman filed a motion for summary judgment. They argued that they did not owe a duty of care to Oh because they had no knowledge that the substances that IBS was storing were hazardous.

The evidence that was presented showed that Mr. Kim, the owner of IBS, did not know that the MOA Oil was highly flammable and hazardous before the accident. He did not inform TIAA or Cushman that the substances were hazardous since he wasn’t aware that they were. The lease that IBS signed included a provision prohibiting the storage of hazardous chemicals or using them on-site without prior written consent from the owners. The lease also placed the responsibility for complying with all regulations and laws regarding hazardous chemicals on the tenant. The landlord retained the responsibility for maintaining the exterior of the premises.

In the plaintiffs’ opposition to the summary judgment motion, they presented information that the senior property manager had observed several blue 55-gallon drums outside of the premises in its yard. The plaintiffs argued that the presence of these drums gave the defendants notice that the materials inside of the drums were hazardous because of their labels. Kim ordered three 55-gallon drums of MOA Oil in Sept. 2015 from a new supplier in South Korea to save money. He had questioned the supplier about why they said that they were made in Japan, and the supplier told him that it had simply reused drums that had previously been used to store something else. When the explosion occurred, two of the drums were inside of the building. The third one outside was empty, according to the testimony of Kim and Christopher Gardea, a fire inspector who investigated the fire after it occurred.

The court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. It found that the defendants had presented evidence showing their lack of knowledge about the hazardous nature of the MOA Oil and that the drums had been mislabeled. It also found that landlords are not liable when a tenant violates an ordinance. The plaintiffs filed an appeal.

Issue: Does a landlord have a duty to discover hazardous materials on the property leased by a tenant?

The plaintiffs argued that TIAA and Cushman had a duty to discover that Kim and IBS were storing and using hazardous chemicals on the leased property. They argued that the chemicals should have been discovered by the property manager when she performed her inspections of the outside of the premises since some drums were present in the fenced-in yard of the premises rented by IBS. They argued that the defendants owed a duty of care to the decedent to discover the hazardous materials and to abate the dangerous condition that they created.

Rule: Landlords do not owe a duty to discover hazards that they did not create.

Landlords owe a duty of care to tenants to correct hazards that the landlords create or that they know or reasonably should know about. However, this duty does not extend to hazards that the landlords are unaware of and that are created by the tenants and that they could not reasonably have discovered.

Analysis

The plaintiffs argued several things on appeal. They argued that the negligence per se doctrine requires a presumption that the defendants acted negligently when a regulation or statute was violated. They then argued that there was substantial evidence that the defendants violated multiple provisions of the fire code. They argued that the defendants violated the code that required people to obtain an operational permit to store, transport, handle, or dispense hazardous materials. However, the court noted that no evidence had been presented to show that the defendants had engaged in any of those activities and that they could not have reasonably known about the existence of the hazardous chemicals since Kim was not even aware that the MOA Oil was dangerous. The plaintiffs argued that ignorance of the law is not an excuse. However, the appeals court pointed out that the defendants were unaware of the facts but not the law. This meant that they could not be responsible for their tenant’s violation of the fire code.

The plaintiffs also argued that another section of the fire code was violated by the defendants. This section makes owners responsible for abating dangerous conditions that violate the fire code. The appeals court found that the defendants did not have the responsibility to abate a dangerous condition that was created by IBS and that the defendants did not know about it.

The appeals court also found that the defendants did not have control over the fenced area after reviewing the lease. Instead, IBS had control of both the portion of the building it had leased as well as the fenced yard. The court also found that the defendants had no knowledge that dangerous chemicals were being stored even though one drum was sitting outside of the building in the fenced yard since it was mislabeled and empty. The plaintiffs also argued that the landlords had a duty to inspect the premises at the time of the 2015 lease renewal. However, the appeals court found that the duty to inspect only arises when the landlords learn of a reason for doing so. In the case of IBS, the court found that the landlords had no reason to believe that an inspection was necessary at the time of the lease renewal.

Conclusion

The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s judgment dismissing the case. The defendants were awarded their costs on appeal.

Contact an experienced Los Angeles personal injury lawyer

People who are injured while they are visiting or working on premises that are owned by a landlord may have grounds to file a lawsuit. However, the landlord’s liability will depend on whether the landlord knew or had reason to know about the existence of dangerous conditions. An experienced attorney at the law firm of Steven M. Sweat, Personal Injury Lawyers can evaluate the facts of what happened and explain whether you might have grounds for a claim. Contact us today to request a consultation by calling us at 866.966.5240.

Sources

[1] https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B297567.PDF

Californians should be able to walk or ride bicycles safely in cities across the state. However, the roads in most of the state’s cities are woefully inadequate, endangering pedestrians and cyclists. Many state roads that run through cities are congested with vehicle traffic, and many do not have the right infrastructure to allow cyclists to share them with cars or pedestrians to safely cross them. The lack of adequate infrastructure on state roads that double as streets in cities in California has contributed to the high injury and fatality rates of bicyclists and pedestrians.

One bill, SB 127, that was passed in the legislature would have helped to solve some of the issues by requiring Caltrans to add safety infrastructure for bicyclists and pedestrians when state roads that double as streets in cities are repaired. However, Gov. Gavin Newsom recently vetoed this bill instead of signing it into law. His action potentially threatens the safety of many Californians when they ride bicycles or choose to walk to reach their destinations.

Pedestrian and bicycle injury and fatality statistics

The California Department of Public Health compiled statistics from 2007 to 2013 for bicycle accidents in which motor vehicles were involved. The data does not include single bicycle collisions, collisions between bicycles and pedestrians, or collisions involving two or more bicycles. According to the CDPH, 86,927 bicyclists were injured in collisions with motor vehicles from 2007 to 2013, and 918 were killed. Among the non-fatal injuries, 86,630 occurred in urban areas. Out of the people who were killed, 892 died in bicycle crashes in cities.

The statistics for pedestrian injuries and fatalities are similarly problematic. From 2008 to 2017, pedestrian deaths reportedly increased by 38.4% in California. During those nine years, 7,127 Californians were killed while they were walking. While it is clear that something should be done to improve the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians, little has been accomplished to make the streets safer for people who share the roads with cars.

Infrastructure problems

Research has shown that bicycle facilities that keep bicyclists separated from motor vehicles help to prevent accidents and save lives. Bicycle lanes and separated bicycle routes help to prevent accidents with adjacent traffic and doorings from cars that are parked along the sides of the streets. Similarly, well-marked crosswalks and pedestrian walkways help to prevent pedestrian injuries and fatalities. However, many streets in Los Angeles and elsewhere in the state do not have a good bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Some streets do not have any infrastructure for bicyclists and pedestrians at all. This places bicyclists and pedestrians at a heightened risk of injuries and increases the likelihood of serious bicycle and pedestrian accidents.

Some state roads double as streets when they run through cities. For example, Santa Monica Boulevard in Los Angeles is a state road. These roads are maintained by Caltrans instead of by the cities. While some cities like Los Angeles have detailed plans to add bicycle infrastructure, Caltrans has stated that it can only add infrastructure for bicyclists and pedestrians when it is feasible to do so. In nearly every case, Caltrans has found that it is not feasible and has refused to add safety features for bicyclists and pedestrians to the streets and roads that it maintains. SB 127 would have solved that problem by requiring Caltrans to add bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure whenever it repairs roads that double as city streets.

Veto of SB 127

Senate Bill 127 was proposed by Senator Scott Wiener (D) and enjoyed bipartisan support. The bill, called the Complete Streets for Active Living Bill, was passed by the California legislature and sent to Gov. Newsom to be signed into law. SB 127 would have required Caltrans to consider safety improvements to state roads that are streets in cities. However, Newsom vetoed it on Oct. 11 despite the dangerous conditions of the state’s roads for bicyclists and pedestrians. In his veto statement, Newsom said that he supports safety for bicyclists and pedestrians but thought that the cost of the law would be too high. Caltrans estimated that it would cost $1 billion per year to implement the law, an argument that others have called absurd. Wiener estimated that it would cost from $20,000 to $600,000 for each mile of roadwork as compared to Caltrans’s estimate of $4.5 million per mile.

Pedestrian accidents more common in urban areas

As we have previously discussed, pedestrian accidents are much more frequent in urban centers like Los Angeles. This is because the city streets are congested with traffic. When pedestrians do not have safe sidewalks and crosswalks to walk on, they are much likelier to be involved in a serious accident with a motor vehicle. Some of the problems that can lead to pedestrian accidents include the following:

• Distracted driving
• Running red lights
• Inattentive driving
• Failing to stop at stop signs
• Failing to yield to pedestrians who are crossing in crosswalks or at unmarked intersections
• Speeding
• Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs

If pedestrians had safer sidewalks and crosswalks, and more pedestrian walkways were installed over major streets, they would be much less likely to be injured or killed in accidents with motor vehicles on the streets of Los Angeles.

Bicycle accidents

A lack of good bicycle infrastructure for cyclists has also led to significant safety concerns. Many of the most common bicycle accident scenarios could be avoided with good infrastructure. The common bicycle accident scenarios that we regularly see include the following:

• Dooring accidents
• Lefthand turn accidents
• Unexpected reversals
• Merging and lane changes
• Not providing enough distance when passing bicyclists
• Unsafe road conditions
• Intersection accidents

Even adding bicycle lanes on streets that allow cars to park alongside the roads is not enough. Many accidents occur in these scenarios when people open their car doors into the bicycle lanes and in the paths of oncoming cyclists. Separate bicycle facilities would prevent many types of bicycle accidents involving cars and help to save lives.

Get help from an experienced bicycle and pedestrian accident lawyer

While Gov. Newsom has stated that the Safe Streets bill was too cost-prohibitive, his veto threatens the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians in Los Angeles and other major cities in the state. If you have suffered serious injuries in a bicycle or pedestrian accident, you should talk to one of the experienced attorneys at the Steven M. Sweat Personal Injury Lawyers about your rights and legal options. Schedule a free consultation today by calling 866.966.5240.

Thanks to startup companies, including Lyft, Lime, and Bird, e-scooters have become a nearly ubiquitous part of Los Angeles’s landscape. Tourists and residents can unlock these scooters with their smartphones and ride them to get to where they need to go or to use for sightseeing. While e-scooters can be fun to use and are better for the environment, they also carry risks of injury for both the riders and for others around them. You need to understand the dangers of riding electric scooters, how accidents happen with them, and how to minimize your risk of accidents. If you are injured in an e-scooter accident, you also should understand your rights.

Dangers of riding electric scooters in Los Angeles

While e-scooters seem to be everywhere in Los Angeles, riding them can be dangerous to riders and pedestrians. Many people who rent scooters do not have experience in how to handle them. They might be tourists who want a quick way to get around who rent e-scooters. Some riders choose to ride them on sidewalks even though it is illegal to do so in Los Angeles, which places pedestrians at risk. E-scooter riders are supposed to ride their scooters on streets or in bicycle lanes. However, many areas in Los Angeles do not have bicycle lanes, and forcing e-scooter riders to share the roads with motor vehicles places the riders in danger from collisions with cars. Finally, many people ride e-scooters without helmets. The companies that have rental scooters in place do not provide helmets for riders to use.

During the one year from Sept. 1, 2017, to Aug. 31, 2018, 249 people in Los Angeles went to two emergency departments on the west side with injuries related to e-scooter use. The study, which was conducted by UCLA, found that there is a low rate of compliance with age regulations for riders along with low rates of using helmets. A study that was conducted by Consumer Reports found that there were at least 1,545 injuries in the U.S. caused by e-scooters in 2018. Since most hospitals don’t track these types of accidents, many more likely occurred.

How accidents can happen

Like bicyclists and pedestrians, e-scooter riders do not have anything to protect them from the forces that are released in collisions. Many do not wear helmets and are inexperienced riders. When they are forced to ride on the streets, motorists around them have a harder time seeing them. This may cause the motorists to collide with e-scooter riders simply because they failed to see them.

Many e-scooter accidents happen at intersections when the riders are crossing the roads. Intersection accidents can be caused when the motorists are distracted and fail to stop at crosswalks or at unmarked intersections to allow the e-scooter riders to cross. Similarly, drivers turning onto streets might fail to notice e-scooter riders in the crosswalks of the streets onto which they are turning.

Dooring accidents have long been a problem for bicyclists, and they are becoming a problem for e-scooter riders as well. These types of accidents happen when drivers who are parked along the sides of streets open their car doors in the path of e-scooters, causing the riders to collide with the doors.

Road hazards can also endanger e-scooter riders. People who are riding scooters and who encounter road debris, potholes, broken asphalt, and other problems can fall off their scooters and suffer injuries. Swerving accidents are also common. These accidents can happen when the e-scooter riders have to temporarily swerve into an adjacent traffic lane to avoid colliding with someone else and then are struck by vehicles. Vehicles also sometimes swerve into e-scooters that are traveling next to them.

E-scooter accidents also can happen on sidewalks when riders collide with pedestrians or stationary objects. When e-scooter riders collide with pedestrians, the pedestrians may suffer serious injuries.

Types of serious injuries that can result

Several common types of serious injuries that can result from e-scooters have been identified. According to Healthline, some of the most common types of e-scooter injuries include the following:

• Closed head injuries
• Lacerations
• Concussions
• Skull fractures
• Nasal fractures
• Neck fractures
• Facial fractures
• Internal bleeding
• Fractures to other parts of the body
• Paralysis

In addition to the common types of injuries, people who are involved in e-scooter accidents can also be killed. Business Insider reports that 11 people were killed because of e-scooter accidents between Jan. 1, 2018, and June 1, 2019.

Minimizing your risk

If you plan to ride on an e-scooter, you should take steps to minimize your accident risk. You should always wear a helmet when you plan to ride an e-scooter. Since the companies do not provide helmets with their e-scooters, this means that you will need to bring your own with you. It is also a good idea to wear knee pads, shin guards, elbow pads, and wrist guards to provide you with more protection in case you fall off of the scooter.

You should also avoid riding on sidewalks to prevent collisions with pedestrians and bicyclists. When you ride on the streets, you should make sure that you make yourself visible. Wear brightly colored clothing so that motorists can see you. When you are riding on streets with cars parked along the sides of the roads, pay attention to both the traffic next to you as well as any occupied, parked vehicles so you can avoid dooring accidents. Do not use e-scooters when you have been drinking or using drugs. Like other motorists, you are prohibited from operating an e-scooter when you are under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Finally, ride the e-scooter in the same direction as traffic, and use hand signals to let motorists know when you plan to turn.

Can an injured person recover damages for an e-scooter accident?

It is possible to recover damages when you have been injured in an e-scooter accident. As we have previously explained, Lime and Bird both have liability waivers contained within their apps. However, there may be other parties that are responsible for your e-scooter accident.

If you were injured in a collision with a motor vehicle or by a car door, you may be able to file a lawsuit against the motorist for his or her negligence. You may be able to recover compensation even if you were partially at fault for your accident. California follows the pure comparative negligence standard, which means that sharing fault will not bar you from recovery. Instead, your damages will be reduced by the percentage of fault that you had in your accident’s cause.

If you were injured because of a road defect, you may have the right to sue the city for your injuries. To prevail in this type of claim, you will need to show that the dangerous road condition existed for such a length of time that it reasonably should have been discovered and corrected or that the city had actual knowledge of it and failed to take corrective measures.

Finally, if you are a pedestrian who was injured by an e-scooter rider, you can file a lawsuit against the rider. If the rider was riding under the influence or on the sidewalks in violation of the municipal code, you can use these facts to prove his or her liability.

Contact an e-scooter injury lawyer at Steven M. Sweat Personal Injury Lawyers

If you have suffered serious injuries in an e-scooter accident, you should talk to an experienced personal injury attorney at Steven M. Sweat Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us today to schedule your free consultation by calling 310-592-0445.

Factual and procedural background of the case

A helicopter was being piloted in Prescott, Arizona over the Verde River in June 2012 when it hit a suspended cable that was not marked. The cable was 40 feet up in the air over the river. The United States Geological Survey had installed the cable in 1934 to collect water samples and streamflow measurements. It had been used continuously since 1988 and was nearly invisible from distances of 100 feet away. Despite this, the USGS never marked the cable or added warnings about it because the cable did not meet the agency’s guidelines for marking.

The collision killed the pilot and his three passengers. The pilot’s estate and the helicopter’s owner filed a lawsuit against the USGS, alleging that the government employees were negligent in not marking the cable so that the sovereign immunity under the Federal Torts Claim Act was waived. The federal district court dismissed the case, ruling that it did not have proper subject matter jurisdiction because an exception applied to the waiver of immunity. The trial court found that the USGS’s decision not to mark the cable was a discretionary decision made under a policy. The plaintiffs appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.

Issue: Whether the USGS’s decision not to mark the cable was an exception to the waiver of sovereign immunity under the Federal Torts Claim Act

Since 1980, the USGS had regularly reviewed its policy about marking cables. Many of the reviews have followed aviation accidents involving unmarked cables. The USGS has adopted the FAA’s regulations in all of its marking policies. Under 14 C.F.R. § 77.9, the FAA requires that it is notified about any structure that is 200 feet above the ground. Notice is also required for any structures that are within 5,000 feet of a heliport or 20,000 feet of an airport.

In 1984, the USGS stated in a memorandum that while the FAA didn’t require structures that were below 200 feet to be marked, employees should still consider marking lower structures and cables if they were deemed to be hazards for aircraft that fly at low altitudes. The USGS issued a policy manual in 2008 that required that all cables above 200 feet should be marked and the FAA notified. The USGS also indicated that site-specific data should be considered for lower-hanging cables such as prior accidents, land-management agency requests and the costs of installation among others.

Rule: Claims that are based on the acts or failures to act of government employees during the course and scope of their jobs that are discretionary will not waive the government’s sovereign immunity.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2680, the exceptions to waiving sovereign immunity under the Federal Torts Claim Act are listed. One of the exceptions is for claims of negligence by employees while they are acting in the scope and course of their jobs if their acts or omissions are discretionary in nature. This means that if there is a policy in place that leaves certain decisions about whether to act to the employees’ discretion after considering all of the factors, the government’s immunity to liability will not be waived, and the courts will not have subject matter jurisdiction to hear the claims.

Analysis

The Federal Torts Claim Act waives the government’s sovereign immunity for claims involving the negligence actions or omissions of employees while they are working in the scope and course of their jobs in 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b). However, if the discretionary exception applies, the immunity will not be waived. If the government’s immunity is not waived, then it cannot be held to be liable for damages that arise out of the claim. In Berkovitz v. United States, 486 U.S. 531 (1988), the Supreme Court of the United States provided a two-part test that courts are to apply when they are trying to determine whether the discretionary exception applies. Courts are first supposed to determine whether the decision is discretionary or whether there are any mandated requirements to act. If the decision is discretionary, the courts are then to consider whether the action taken was based on considerations of public policy. If the courts determine that the act or omission was based on considerations of public policy, the discretionary exception will apply, and the sovereign immunity of the government will not be waived.

In the Morales case, the cable was less than the 200 feet specified under the FAA rules and the USGS policy. The court also found that the USGS’s inclusion of the ability of employees to consider other site-specific factors pointed to the fact that decisions about whether or not to mark a lower hanging cable were discretionary. The court then considered whether the decision was made in consideration of public policy. It found that the USGS’s decision to defer to the rule-making of the FAA to keep aircraft safe was grounded in matters of public policy.

Conclusion

After finding that the USGS’s failure to mark the low-hanging cable that caused the helicopter crash was discretionary and that it was grounded in considerations of public policy, the 9th Circuit affirmed the ruling of the trial court. It found that since the discretionary exception to the waiver of sovereign immunity applied, there was no subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case. As a result, the case was dismissed.

Contact an experienced Los Angeles personal injury lawyer

If you have suffered a serious personal injury or have lost a loved one because of the negligent actions or failures to act of a government employee while he or she was working, it is important for you to talk to an experienced Los Angeles personal injury attorney as soon as possible. Government claims have much shorter statutes of limitations and have to be filed quickly. Determining whether or not the government will be immune to liability can also be difficult. By getting help from an attorney who is experienced in handling government tort claims quickly, you may be able to learn about your rights and whether or not you might have a valid claim. Contact the Law Offices of Steven M. Sweat today to schedule your consultation so that you can learn more about your own potential claim. Note: for more information on aircraft accident claims, go to our related page here.

Sources

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/17-15215/17-15215-2018-07-13.html?utm_source=summary-newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2018-07-20-personal-injury-5c51f3f8ee&utm_content=text-case-read-more-2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2680 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/77.9 https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/486/531/

Factual background

In Sept. 2014, three cars were driving in the on-ramp to the U.S. 101 freeway in Santa Maria to merge into the southbound lanes. A tractor-trailer was being driven in the #3 lane of the freeway, which was the far right lane into which the three cars were trying to merge. The driver of the tractor-trailer, Charles Laramee, saw the three vehicles on the on-ramp and noticed that a black car was driving aggressively behind the front car. The front car was being driven by a woman named Michelle Adams.

As Adams and the black car got close to the freeway’s entrance, the black car aggressively moved over into the lane ahead of Adams while making an obscene gesture at her. Adams then merged behind the black car and in front of the tractor-trailer. The third car was driven by Joshua Shiver. He saw that there appeared to be enough room to merge in front of the tractor-trailer and behind the car driven by Adams. After he merged, the black car in front of Adams slammed on its brakes, causing Adams to slam on her brakes to avoid hitting the black car. Shiver also had to slam on his brakes to avoid hitting Adams. Laramee applied his brakes but was unable to stop his fully loaded tractor-trailer before it crashed into the rear end of Shiver’s car. Shiver filed a lawsuit against Laramee and John Shapka Trucking Ltd., Laramee’s employer.

Issue: Whether the sudden emergency defense is available in a situation involving road rage?

The defendants, Charles Laramie and John Shapka Trucking Ltd., filed a motion for summary judgment after a deposition in which Shiver testified that he witnessed that Laramie had slowed before he merged behind Adams and the black car on the highway. The defendants asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit on the basis of the sudden emergency doctrine. They argued that Laramie’s actions were reasonable under the circumstances and that he could not have foreseen the road rage braking by the driver of the black car. Shiver had an expert who opined that Laramie’s actions were negligent because he did not slow down when he saw the black car’s driver driving aggressively on the on-ramp behind Adams. The trial court ruled for the defendants and stated that the sudden emergency doctrine applied under the circumstances. Shiver appealed the trial court’s ruling.

Rule: Defendants who act reasonably in response to a sudden emergency that they did not cause will not be liable if injuries result even if it is later determined that taking a different course of action would have been safer.

In California, the elements of the sudden emergency doctrine are outlined in CACI No. 452. The sudden emergency doctrine is an affirmative defense against negligence claims. Under the doctrine, a defendant will be shielded from liability claims if he or she acted reasonably in reaction to a sudden and unexpected emergency as long as he or she did not cause the emergency. The protection from liability will exist even if another course of action is later determined to have been a safer option than what the defendant did.

Analysis

On appeal, the appellate court examined whether the sudden emergency doctrine applies in a situation involving road rage. The court considered whether or not the truck driver should have reasonably foreseen that the black car would suddenly brake in front of Adams after seeing the driver driving aggressively behind her on the on-ramp and passing her to merge in front of her car. The sudden emergency doctrine is only available in cases in which the unexpected emergency is presented so quickly that the defendant doesn’t have time to react more reasonably. The court also noted that defendants will be denied the use of the affirmative defense if their own negligence contributed to or created the danger. Under the doctrine, the test is whether or not the defendant took the type of action that a reasonably prudent person in his or her circumstances would have likewise taken.

The court analyzed whether Laramie’s actions under the circumstances were what a reasonably prudent person in a similar situation would have taken. The court considered the plaintiff’s expert opinion, construing it liberally. The expert had based his opinion that Laramie was negligent on the basis that he believed that the driver had not slowed down when he saw what was occurring in the on-ramp. However, the court noted that Shiver had testified at his deposition that Laramie had slowed considerably from the time that Shiver first noticed his truck and when Shiver merged into the #3 lane in front of him. The court also analyzed whether Laramie should have reasonably foreseen that the aggressive driver of the black car would brake in front of Adams in an apparent act of road rage.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the trial court’s ruling for the defendants. It ruled that Laramie had acted reasonably under the circumstances and that he could not be expected to foresee an act of road rage. The court noted that the expert had based his testimony on the idea that Laramie had not slowed when he saw the aggressive driving behavior of the black car around Adams while they were on the on-ramp. However, Shiver had testified at the deposition that Laramie had slowed considerably from the time that Shiver first saw him and when Shiver merged. Since Shiver testified that Laramie did slow down, the appeals court ruled that he was stuck with his own deposition testimony. Since the court found that the sudden emergency doctrine applied in the case, the dismissal of the case by the lower court was affirmed.

People who are injured in multi-car accidents that are caused by aggressive drivers in acts of road rage might want to get legal help. Experienced personal injury lawyers may be able to identify the aggressive drivers so that their clients might be able to recover compensation for their losses. To learn about the rights that you might have in your injury claim, call Steven M. Sweat, Personal Injury Lawyers, APC today to schedule your free consultation.

Sources

https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2018/b283420.html?utm_source=summary-newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2018-06-15-personal-injury-62337cfb29&utm_content=text-case-read-more-21 https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/400/452/

As an unsafe lane change accident attorney in Los Angeles, I know that, despite Mayor Garcetti’s Drive to Zero initiative, traffic accidents in Los Angeles have been increasing. In 2016, for example, 260 people were killed in Los Angeles accidents. The city also experienced an overall increase of 7 percent in the total number of vehicle collisions from 2015 to 2016 with a total of 55,350 collisions happening in 2016. Across the state, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that 3,623 people were killed in 2016, which was a significant increase over the number of people who died in 2015.

Part of the increase can be attributed to an increased number of vehicles on the roads. Because of the traffic congestion in and around Los Angeles, some drivers make unsafe lane changes. When a driver suddenly changes lanes with little warning, they may collide with other motorists or cause the motorists who are present in the lanes to swerve into traffic in order to avoid being hit. Unsafe lane change accidents can cause serious injuries or fatalities, and they are especially dangerous for motorcyclists.

Causes of unsafe lane change accidents

An unsafe lane change occurs when a motorist enters into a lane abruptly and either collides with another vehicle that is already present in the lane or creates dangerous situations for motorists in that lane. Some of these incidents happen when a vehicle is trying to enter into a lane next to them or when they are merging onto a highway from an entrance ramp. Unsafe lane change accidents may be caused by several different negligent driving behaviors, including the following:

• Failing to use a turn signal when changing lanes or when turning
• Failing to see a vehicle in the adjacent lane
• Misjudging the speed of a fast-approaching vehicle in an adjacent lane
• Failing to check blind spots before changing lanes
• Attempting to change lanes at intersections
• Distracted driving
• Aggressive driving
• Falling asleep behind the wheel
• Two vehicles attempting to merge into a middle lane between them simultaneously

In some cases, a motorist who is present in a lane when another vehicle suddenly moves into it may be forced to swerve left, causing him or her to have a collision with a third vehicle.

Unsafe lane change motorcycle accidents

Unsafe lane change accidents involving motorcyclists may be especially serious. Motorcyclists have little to protect them from the forces of collisions. In many cases involving motorcyclists, the drivers fail to notice the motorcyclists that are present and change lanes, striking them. Drivers are supposed to check their blind spots and use their turn signals when they are changing lanes. Unfortunately, many drivers simply fail to drive with reasonable caution and switch lanes unsafely, endangering motorcyclists who are present in the lanes. Some of these accidents also happen when motorcyclists are lane-splitting, which is legal to do in California. In these types of accidents, the drivers do not check their blind spots and attempt to change lanes, colliding with the motorcyclists who are riding next to them.

Liability issues in unsafe lane change accidents

Under California Vehicle Code § 22107, motorists are not supposed to change lanes or to turn until it is reasonably safe for them to do so. They are also mandated to use their turn signals so that other drivers are alerted to their intention to change lanes. When a motorist changes lanes unsafely, there may be complex liability issues. There may be multiple vehicles involved such as when a motorist swerves to avoid the vehicle entering his or her lane and collides with traffic to the motorist’s left. Many unsafe lane change accidents also occur at high rates of speed, resulting in serious injuries or fatalities. When these accidents happen, it may be necessary to hire an accident reconstruction expert in order to prove the liability of the motorist who suddenly changed lanes when it was unsafe for him or her to do so.

Unsafe lane change consequences

Unsafe lane changes may cause other vehicles to lose control, roll over or collide with other vehicles. These accidents may also cause serious injuries, including the following:

• Traumatic brain injuries
• Crushing injuries
• Spinal cord injuries
• Head injuries
• Fractures
• Disfigurement
• Paralysis
• Death

It is possible to hold the responsible motorist liable to pay damages when their negligence has resulted in your injuries and losses. Some of the damages that might be available to you include your medical expenses, income losses, future losses in your ability to earn a living, pain and suffering, emotional trauma and others.

Contact an experienced Los Angeles unsafe lane change accident lawyer

Being injured in an accident that was caused by a motorist who changed lanes unsafely can be life-changing. Because of the complexities of these types of accident cases, it may be best for you to seek help from an experienced accident lawyer in Los Angeles. Your attorney may work with accident reconstruction experts, investigators and others to build a case for you that clearly demonstrates the liability of the motorist who caused your accident. This may help you to recover the maximum damages so that you are fairly compensated for the losses that you have suffered. Contact our law firm today to schedule your consultation so that you can learn more about the rights that you might have.

Sources

https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/SASStoredProcess/guest

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-2016-traffic-deaths-20170403-story.html

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH§ionNum=22107

As a Los Angeles traffic accident attorney, I know that traffic collisions are prevalent in L.A., and the city experiences higher auto accident fatality rates than do other similar cities around the U.S. In 2016, 260 people were killed in motor vehicle accidents in Los Angeles. When the city is compared to others, Los Angeles had a fatality rate of 6.27 deaths per 100,000 people in 2012. Chicago, by contrast, had a fatality rate of 5.34 deaths per 100,000 people, and New York City had a fatality rate of 3.21 deaths per 100,000 people. It is clear that Los Angeles has a serious problem with motor vehicle crashes. In an effort to reduce the number of traffic injuries and fatalities, the city has adopted an initiative to reach zero traffic fatalities in the city by 2025.

Common types of Los Angeles traffic accidents

Pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists in Los Angeles have much higher risks of dying in accidents than do other types of travelers. Pedestrians and bicyclists are involved in 14 percent of accidents in the city but account for more than half of all of the fatalities that occur. Motorcyclists are involved in 3 percent of Los Angeles accidents but comprise 15 percent of the fatalities that happen. Many of the accidents with pedestrians and bicyclists happen at intersections when vehicles are turning. Motorcyclists may be involved in accidents when motorists turn, pull out into traffic or change lanes while failing to see the motorcycles.

Speed is a major factor in numerous accidents in the city. Other common types of accidents in the city are caused by distracted driving when drivers are texting or talking on their cell phones, changing their radios, eating or doing other distracting things while they drive. With the stop-and-go traffic that frequently happens on the city’s main arteries, rear-end often occur. A large percentage of accidents are also caused by people who fail to obey traffic signals and stop signs. Some motorists speed up when the traffic lights turn yellow in an effort to make it through intersections, but they then hit cars in the intersections because the lights have turned red by the time they reach the intersections. Drunk driving remains a big problem despite the availability of alternate means of transportation in Los Angeles, including public transportation, taxis and ride-share services. Finally, many accidents happen at night when visibility is poor.

Campaign to reduce accidents and injuries

Mayor Eric Garcetti issued an executive directive in Aug. 2015 in order to launch Los Angeles’s Vision Zero Initiative. The aim of the initiative is to use data-driven research in order to reduce traffic accidents and fatalities over 10 years. The city believes that it can reach its goal of having zero traffic fatalities by 2025.

The initiative is focused on improvements through engineering to make roadways safer to use for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists and motorists who are sharing them. Los Angeles believes gathering data and thoroughly evaluating it is key to understanding where the most problematic areas lie. The city has identified a number of streets that it calls the high-injury network. While these streets make up just 6 percent of the roadways in the city, 65 percent of the fatal pedestrian and bicycle accidents happen on them. Los Angeles is focusing on installing improvements on these streets in order to meet its initial goal of reducing traffic fatalities by 20 percent during 2017.

Stepped-up enforcement of traffic laws is another component of the Vision Zero Initiative. Law enforcement agencies will work together to focus on high-risk driving behaviors, including speeding, distracted driving, drunk driving and others. The city is also focused on education as an important factor in reaching the goal of zero deaths by 2025.

Problems with accident-reduction plans

Traffic accidents are largely preventable, and the city’s efforts may help to reduce the number of deaths that occur through its combination of approaches. Unfortunately, however, it is impossible to force all drivers to drive with reasonable care, and there will always be some drivers who drive negligently and cause accidents as a result. Even if Los Angeles and other cities around the country are unable to reach their goals of zero traffic deaths, any reduction in the number of fatalities would be welcome.

Los Angeles and other cities with drive to zero initiatives are following in the footsteps of Sweden. In 1997, the Swedish Government wrote a law called the Vision Zero plan. The country’s fatality rate has halved since 2000 as a result of its initiative. Sweden has focused on infrastructure changes with separate pedestrian zones and barriers to separate cyclists from other vehicles. It has also focused on increased policing to help it get where it is today. Its fatality rate has fallen to fewer than 3 deaths per 100,000 people across the country. If Los Angeles can mirror the success of Sweden’s efforts, it will be a victory even if some deaths still do occur.

Contact an experienced Los Angeles personal injury attorney

Los Angeles’s initiative to reach zero traffic deaths within 10 years is laudable. It is important that people drive with caution and avoid violating traffic laws. If people are seriously injured by negligent motorists, they might want to file personal injury lawsuits in order to hold the motorists accountable and to recover damages for their losses. An experienced personal injury attorney might help to recover the maximum monetary amounts for his or her injured clients through skilled negotiation and the correct identification of all available claims and recovery sources. Contact a personal injury attorney today to learn more about the rights that you might have in your own accident case.

Sources: http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/02/economist-explains-16 https://www.joomag.com/magazine/vision-zero-action-plan-2017/0893807001485436685?short

As a Pacific Coast Highway accident attorney for over 20 years, I have seen both the beauty and danger of this great coastal roadway. The Pacific Coast Highway (PCH), which spans 1700 miles along the coast of three states, is one of the most popular scenic drives in the U. S. Throughout the drive, there are a number of natural and man-made sights to see, but there are also a number of areas that have become so popular that driving has become heavily congested and even hazardous at times.

A recent study, funded by the Orange County Transportation Authority and the California Department of Transportation, evaluated the 37 mile stretch between Seal Beach and San Clemente in Orange County in order to determine ways that travel along the PCH can be made safer and more efficient.

The study was undertaken at the request of several of the cities located along that stretch of road, and the results have yielded some ideas for managing traffic and improving safety in a number of ways. One of the major drawbacks for these plans, however, is the exorbitant cost associated with making the needed changes.

In Newport Beach, California, there were 11 areas identified as needing improvement, but the major problems are heavy pedestrian traffic, narrow roadways combined with on-street parking and lots of bicyclists. Corona del Mar experiences many of these same issues as well.

In Huntington Beach, one of the major issues is the lack of coordination in the timing of traffic signals. This is causing significant back up at peak travel times that delay motorists. Traffic delays are further complicated by the large volumes of pedestrian traffic that are attempting to cross the road safely. Bicycles in that area are being forced to travel between parked cars, causing safety issues for the cyclists and for pedestrians alike.

In Laguna Beach, motorists and pedestrians are experiencing the same delays and congestion, and have the additional complication of narrow or missing sidewalks, putting pedestrians at even greater risk.

There have been a number of well-publicized accidents and fatalities along the PCH over the years, and the residents have been demanding upgrades for a long time. Though this study identifies the risks, it will up to the individual cities to implement the needed changes.

The proposed changes include widening roadways, installing fiber optic cable to coordinate traffic signals, installing bike lanes and eliminating parking spaces. Some county officials are concerned that some of these proposed changes, such as eliminating street parking, will cause even more problems with traffic flow. Additionally, there is only so much space to widen the roads, and in some areas it will be impossible.

For now, some of the most problematic areas are receiving grant funding to help get their projects underway. Approximately 2.25 million dollars is being granted by Orange County, and the city of Newport Beach has promised to contribute almost a half a million.

Despite these future improvements, traveling the PCH can pose risks for motorists, pedestrians and cyclists alike. The increase in summer-time vacation traffic can only increase these risks. Vacationers may not be aware of the potential hazards and may not exercise proper caution.

If you are injured in an accident on the Pacific Coast Highway in Huntington Beach or other Orange County locale, it may be advisable to consult an attorney who is familiar with personal injury claims. Accident claims are intended to help injured victims offset the costs related to any injuries, and the poor road conditions, along with other factors, may need to be evaluated in order to ensure that you are fairly compensated. A local attorney will have the most up-to-date and accurate information about the road conditions that may vitally impact your case.

Sources: http://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/tn-dpt-me-0428-pch-20160427-story.html http://www.visittheusa.com/usa/road-trips/road-trips/pch.aspx

The City of Los Angeles has the highest rate of vehicle related accidents in the United States. With a population of over 18.5 million people in the greater Los Angeles area, and an influx of business visitors and tourists, it is very easy to understand how so many accidents can occur in this area.

Add to this fact that LA has some of the most diverse traffic and complicated road systems in the country and each accommodate vehicle, bicycle and foot traffic. LA never sleeps, and this traffic can be experienced at any time of the day or night.

Recent statistics show that over 29,000 accidents occurred in Los Angeles that involved a death or injury in 2013. While a majority of these accidents involved two or more vehicles, there were a significant amount of events that occurred outside of this parameter. Understanding what types of accidents occur in this area will help people stay safer when traveling through LA.

Accident Statistics For Los Angeles

According to the most recent study (2013), the rate of accidents in Los Angeles for events outside of vehicular accidents involving two or more vehicles show:

• Pedestrians were at the highest risk in LA. Almost 2,900 serious accidents occurred in 2013 that involved and injury or death with a vehicle and a pedestrian. • Bicyclists came in second place for highest risk with over 2,300 serious accidents registered during this time. • Motorcycle drivers came in third with a little over 1,200 accidents occurring in LA during 2013

Of these three accident types, almost 2,400 of these accidents involved one of the parties under the influence of alcohol.

In vehicle related accidents involving two or more cars or trucks, the following statistics are quite startling.

• 3,600 accidents occurred between two or more vehicles due to excessive speed. • Over 2,800 accidents happened between the hours of 9:00pm and 3:00am • Over 3,100 accidents resulting in death or injury were caused by a Hit-and-Run driver

When You Have Been Involved In A Vehicle Related Accident In Los Angeles

When you are involved in any type of vehicular accident in LA, it is important that you take the following steps.

• Notify emergency services. You need to make sure that the accident has been reported to the police. The police report will contain key information about the event and will be relevant to your case if you seek compensation. • Get immediate medical treatment. Regardless of how minor your injuries may seem, you should be medically evaluated at the time of the event. A headache may not be from the stress of the accident, it may be a concussion or a sign of another injury. Being medically evaluated will protect your health. • Speak to an attorney. Once your health and injuries have been stabilized, it is important to contact an attorney. Dealing with insurance companies can be quite complicated. Protect your rights as the injured party and talk to an attorney about your case.

If you have been injured, or you have lost a loved one, due to any type of vehicular accident in Los Angeles, you are encouraged to speak with an attorney about your rights to seek compensation. California law provides certain rights to accident victims that will allow them to seek compensation for their injuries and losses.

Importance of Hiring A Quality Los Angeles Accident Lawyer

By working with an attorney, you will avoid the mishaps that are often experienced when dealing with an insurance company during the claim process. Your lawyer will make sure that the insurer complies with state law and the terms of their insurance policy to provide you with a fair and complete form of compensation for your losses.

Sources:

California Office of Traffic Safety (2013), OTS Collision Rankings

Could more traffic collisions result from “springing ahead” or “falling back” on our time? For years, there have been questions and concerns about the advantages and disadvantages of daylight saving time. Government leaders and regular people have long wondered whether it really works and if there are any measurable benefits. One study conducted by the University of British Columbia argues that it’s not as beneficial as proponents may think. The study, which is entitled “Sleep Deficit, Fatal Accidents and the Spring Shift to Daylight Saving Time,” found that 17 percent more car accidents occur in the week after the time change. Furthermore, fatal traffic collisions increase by 6 percent.

Explanations for Increased Traffic Accidents

Changing the time is a simple task, but it might not be so easy for Americans to adjust their internal clocks. It’s especially difficult for insomniacs and adults who struggle to get the recommended eight hours of quality sleep. The study’s lead researcher, sleep expert and professor emeritus Stanley Coren, found that any small advantages associated with daylight saving time are dramatically offset by the high cost of increased traffic accidents.

Low available light isn’t the only cause of accidents. Experts say that altered sleep patterns have a considerable effect. Multiple studies have shown that people have difficulty getting restful sleep for several days after the time change. Altered sleep patterns and sleep deprivation could be responsible for inattentive driving, poor decision-making and slow reaction times. Every year, sleepy drivers cause $48 billion in damages. According to official estimates, drowsiness plays a role in nearly one-fifth of all car accidents. Drowsy drivers are especially active on the days following the time change.

The Story behind Daylight Saving Time

The concept for daylight saving time isn’t new. It was first advocated by Ben Franklin, who said that it would reduce demand for expensive wax candles. By World War II, the conservation measure caught on in America and Europe. Then, it was revived during the energy crisis of the 1970s, and it’s been in place ever since.

In the early 1980s, daylight saving time began at the end of April and ended in late October. Under the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1986, it was extended to begin in early April. Nearly two decades later, lawmakers passed the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Under this law, daylight saving time begins in early March and ends in the beginning of November. At first, senators wanted daylight saving time to end in late November, but farmers and airline lobbyists successfully argued against it.

The Cost of Springing Ahead

Originally, proponents believed that taking advantage of available daylight would save energy. Now that efficiency has improved, opponents argue that the savings are very small and that there might not be any benefits. Economists estimate that the time change costs Americans $434 million annually. This includes health care costs, lost earnings and property damage related to traffic collisions, particularly in the early morning.

According to the Insurance Research Council, a single car accident costs $23,400 on average. This includes $15,000 for bodily injuries and about $7,000 in property damage and auto repairs. The cost of a pedestrian accident is much higher. The Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine says that accident victims incur $132,000 in medical expenses. Injuries typically involve the head, neck and lower extremities.

The safety of schoolchildren is another hot issue in discussions about daylight saving time. Safety advocates have criticized the timing because children are forced to travel to school and wait for buses before sunrise. Late sunrises are a problem whenever daylight saving time is observed ahead of the vernal equinox. Dark mornings are dangerous for the young and old. Pedestrians, drivers and passengers are all at risk whenever motorists are drowsy or conditions limit visibility. Both of these situations occur immediately after the time change.

Accident Lawsuits

Even a minor accident can leave you with unpaid medical bills, property damage and other losses. An accident attorney can help you recover compensation and make you whole again. Insurance companies are eager to settle for much less than you are owed. Victims of a pedestrian accident, truck accident or car collision deserve compensation for medical care, rehabilitation, lost income and diminished earning capacity. Injured individuals are also entitled to punitive damages for pain and suffering, emotional distress and non-monetary losses. If you have been injured in a traffic collision, contact an accident attorney to discuss your case.

Related Posts: Traffic Accident Claims in the City of L.A. Traffic Accident Claims in the State of CA

Los Angeles car accident claims statistics show that it is one of the most dangerous cities in the United States for auto accident injuries and deaths. Even the safest of drivers and pedestrians are not completely immune to the negligence of others on the road, so it is important to be vigilant and know what to do after an accident.

What Fuels Unsafe Driving Statistics In Los Angeles?

There are several factors contributing to the many accidents involving vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. Too many people drive while they are distracted. This creates an unsafe environment for all others on the roads and sidewalks. Every person who has driven in Los Angeles knows how heavy traffic is on freeways and surface streets, so drivers should pay close attention to the road.

Texting And Driving

One of the most common complains Los Angeles drivers have is other motorists texting while driving. This is a dangerous type of distraction, and it is one of the most common ones in the city and throughout the state of California. Unfortunately, the dangerous trend only seems to grow as more people rely on their phones for both communicating and using the Internet. In 2008, the number of tickets issued for texting totaled 3,000, according to the California Office of Traffic Safety. That number took a drastic jump to 21,000 in 2012.

Other Forms Of Distracted Driving

Eating, talking on the phone, trying to read or to do other things while driving may result in an accident. California police issued 400,000 tickets for distracted driving in 2012, and a considerable portion of those were issued in the Los Angeles metro area. That number was an increase of more than 30 percent since 2012, so statistics indicate that the problem is only worsening. Since law enforcement officers have been cracking down harder on offenders during the past several years, the continual increase is discouraging to police and residents who want to stay safe.

Is Los Angeles Really That Bad For Accidents?

Even in years past, the Los Angeles metro area was notorious for deaths after vehicle accidents. The number of deaths in the metro area was 745 in 2005, and the number of injuries exceeded 86,000. Statistics continually rise in the city itself and the metro area. According to the local LA Weekly newspaper, Los Angeles ranked second in 2012 as being the most deadly city for pedestrians who were hit by vehicles. Los Angeles had a total of 99 that year. This total was only for the city of Los Angeles, which excluded the rest of the metro area.

The Los Angeles Police Department said there are about 20,000 crashes recorded by them every year. Keep in mind that those crashes are in Los Angeles alone, but the metro area includes several other cities and counties. LAPD sources also said that nearly 50 percent of the crashes recorded within city limits in 2009 were hit-and-run crashes. They said there are about 4,000 of these cases every year. To put into perspective how significant this percentage is, the average amount of hit-and-run crashes is only about 10 percent overall in the United States.

How To Make Los Angeles Roads Safer

Making the metro area safer is a task that requires constant effort from all residents. These simple tips are helpful, and every driver should make them habits:

• Call 911 for any suspected drunk drivers. • Turn cell phones off before starting the vehicle, and leave the phone off until reaching the destination. • When it is absolutely necessary to talk while on the road, use an approved hands-free device or pull over. • Pay attention to the road, watch what other drivers are doing and always keep a safe distance. • Avoid texting, eating, talking to friends or indulging in other distractions while behind the wheel. • Always check crosswalks twice for pedestrians.

Help For Injured Pedestrians, Bicyclists And Drivers In Los Angeles

Fortunately, there is hope for people who are injured in auto accidents. When another party is at fault, the injured person is entitled to compensation for damages. These damages include property and physical damages. For example, if a person is injured in a crash caused by another motorist, the injured person may receive compensation for injuries and the damaged vehicle. If the person had personal property in the vehicle that was destroyed, it is possible to be compensated for that with a good lawyer.

Contact The Best Car Accident Attorney In Los Angeles

If you were injured by another motorist while driving, walking or riding a motorcycle or bicycle in or around the greater Los Angeles area, our attorneys can help. The most important thing you need to remember is not to work directly with the at-fault driver’s insurance company. Their only job is to convince you to accept the smallest amount of compensation. However, this may not cover all of your injuries. Many people who are injured have lifelong effects. You may need medication, physical therapy or surgery. If you were partially or fully disabled and can no longer work, you will need money to cover your future living expenses and medical expenses. Do not settle for less than what you are entitled to. Work with a reliable traffic collision attorney who only gets paid when you do. Call us today for a free and confidential consultation. Our toll free statewide accident and injury helpline is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week at 866-966-5240.

Steven M. Sweat, Personal Injury Lawyers, APC
Los Angeles personal injury attorneys. California accident lawyers.
11500 W Olympic Blvd #488
Los Angeles, CA
90064
US

Sources: http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Police-Crack-Down-on-Drivers-Using-Cell-Phones-Next-Month-198824821.html http://grist.org/news/nearly-half-of-los-angeles-car-accidents-are-hit-and-runs/ http://grist.org/news/nearly-half-of-los-angeles-car-accidents-are-hit-and-runs/

Si usted o alguien que usted conoce está herido o muerto como consecuencia de un conductor distraído en California, es importante consultar con un abogado de lesiones personales familiarizado con este tipo de reclamos. El abogado puede ayudar a encontrar pruebas de que el conductor estaba usando un teléfono celular en el momento del incidente. El abogado puede asistir a las víctimas heridas o la familia de la víctima de un homicidio culposo obtener dinero para gastos médicos, gastos funerarios y otros daños causados ​​por el accidente.

Llame sin costo en California | 866-966-5240

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGYC9pEBgZo

Related Resources:

Abogados de Accidentes de Carro de Los Angeles, CA

California law on serving an obviously intoxicated minor provides an exception to the so-called “dram shop” immunity. What does this mean? It means that if a bar, hotel, restaurant or other similar establishment serves a minor who is clearly under the influence at the time of service, they can be held liable for any injury or death that is caused by that alcohol service.

Legal Background of Dram Shop Laws in CA

The word “dram” is an old British unit of measurement that equals 1/16th of an ounce of alcohol. Many states in the U.S. enacted “dram shop” laws that held alcohol serving establishments liable if drunken patrons injured or killed someone. California, on the other hand, enacted specific legislation exempting bars and restaurants and other commercial purveyors of alcohol from any civil liability for personal injury or wrongful death claims arising from the provision of drinks to customers. This is set forth in California Business and Professions Code 25602 which makes it a misdemeanor to serve underage drinkers but, exempts operators from being civilly liable. A major exception to this rule was carved out if it can be shown that alcohol was being served to underage drinkers who were obviously inebriated at the time of service. This provision of law is set forth in California Business and Professions Code 25602.1 which states as follows:

“… a cause of action may be brought by or on behalf of any person who has suffered injury or death against any person licensed, or required to be licensed, pursuant to Section 23300, or any person authorized by the federal government to sell alcoholic beverages on a military base or other federal enclave, who sells, furnishes, gives or causes to be sold, furnished or given away any alcoholic beverage, and any other person who sells, or causes to be sold, any alcoholic beverage, to any obviously intoxicated minor where the furnishing, sale or giving of that beverage to the minor is the proximate cause of the personal injury or death sustained by that person.”

Although the statute uses the term “minor”, this term has been interpreted to mean any person under the legal drinking age of 21 (See: Rogers v. Alvas 160 Cal.App.3d 997). Therefore, if any bar, restaurant, night club, hotel, country club, lounge, concert venues, stadiums or any other establishment that has a liquor license issued by the State of California serves anyone under 21 who shows signs of intoxication at the time they are given a drink, they can be held responsible for a civil action for personal injury or wrongful death if that drunken individual later maims or kills another person.

IMPORTANCE OF HIRING A QUALIFIED INJURY LAWYER EXPERIENCED WITH ALCOHOL RELATED ACCIDENTS INVOLVING UNDERAGE DRINKING IN CALIFORNIA :

Whether the service of alcohol or a drunken minor results in a drunk driving car crash or a bar room brawl, it is critically important to consult with a California attorney familiar with these laws promptly following a resulting injury or death. Early investigation and retention of experts to analyze the facts leading up to the incident can mean the difference between only being able to recover from the drinker or his auto insurance policy and being able to hold the bar or restaurant on the hook through their commercial insurance policy, which usually has a much higher policy limit. Proving an individual was “under age” is not difficult but, proving they were “obviously intoxicated” at the time they were served is much more difficult. Experts such as forensic toxicologists can analyze the blood alcohol content of the drunk driver in connection with the time of alcohol service to extrapolate findings that would show that intoxication was likely at a given point in time when they were given beer or liquor by the bartender. Likewise, there are professional experts who can provide opinions on the signs of “obvious intoxication” and what the standard should be for a bartender to cut that person off. Analysis like this requires cold hard facts that can only come from sources such as eyewitness accounts of how a person appeared and was acting at the time they were being served up. This type of evidence must be locked down by taking depositions of the bar hop, waiters, waitresses, managers and other patrons and be interviewing other witnesses. Likewise, subpoenas can be issued to require a turn over of criminal records such as toxicology reports related to any DUI arrests. This type of detailed leg work can only be performed by a quality personal injury law firm with the resources and wherewithal to execute prompt and thorough discovery.

For more information or a free consultation on any accident or injury claim involving a person under 21 who was served alcohol in California call us statewide at 866-966-5240.

In the world of medicine, Stryker Hip Implant was one of those surgical procedures that required no clinical trial due to the fact that it was similar to previous generations of hip prosthetic devices. Because it was such a ground breaking technology, one that seemed ingenious ever since it was tried, it quickly gained popularity in the medical community as remedy to hip dislocation and joint problems compared to previous generations of hardware.

However, over the years post-surgery complications have increased in patients who have undergone this procedure. In its initial years, medical practitioners claimed that Stryker was a not a metal-on-metal hip implant, unlike other older devices. Therefore, it was deemed to be a success. However, the smaller metallic components in this device used at the junction of the joint itself have created so many complications that a significant percentage of patients have experienced chronic pain and serious complications a few months following the the surgery.

Problems arising out of Stryker Rejuvenate hip prosthetic

The complications and problems as a result of Stryker Rejuvenate are not run of the mill post-surgical pain and discomfort that can be remedied with medication or physiotherapy. The complications that some Stryker patients experience tend to stem from the components of the device themselves. Therefore, with Stryker, the concern is that once a complication has arisen there may be no alternative but to surgically remove the device and surrounding tissues in some cases.

The following are some of the symptoms experienced in patients who are recipients of defective Stryker devices:

• Experiencing pain while going up the stairs.
• Hearing pop sounds from the hip joint.
• Dull and sharp pain near the hip joint.
• Pain during movements like sitting in a car.
• Severe joint pain.
• Inflammation and soreness around the implant.

Unfortunately, the nature of the internal damage that may be related to Stryker hips, patients are at risk for developing complications such as heavy metal poisoning. Blood tests have shown that the metal components of the implant are increasing metallic composition of the blood which is very harmful for the body. Such a condition is called heavy metal poisoning, something that has severe complications due to the chromium and cobalt used in the devices.

In some cases, a patient may have no apparent symptoms of heavy metal poisoning it is not always visible symptom, becoming all the more dangerous because the levels may be building in the body without a patient’s knowledge.

Legal issues surrounding the technology

Patients who have been diagnosed with heavy metal poisoning as a result of Stryker are advised to undergo a hip revision surgery. The aim of this procedure would be to replace the components that are malfunctioning, making the hip joint fully functional again. With medication and regular checkup, the concentration of metals is the blood will be reduced and the pain and soreness around the joint will be minimized.

However, being a patient who had just heard the news of his surgery becoming a failure is hard. Not only this, it is not fair on the patients who went through tremendous pain and suffering to get a hip implant only to discover it has harmed them even more. Therefore, patients of Stryker are now entitled to legal compensation that can be demanded by hiring a Stryker hip recall lawyer.

Following are the areas that the compensation accounts for:

• Medical expenses of the revised surgery and any medications prescribed.
• If you have experienced disability as a result of the procedure, compensation would also cover that.
• Any loss of wages because of being unemployed as a result of the surgery will be accounted for by your lawyer in the compensation.
• Rehabilitation following a revision surgery

Presently, Stryker cases have been consolidated into a multi-district litigation (MDL) where the cases will be consolidated for discovery purposes.

Resources:

• http://www.prweb.com/releases/stryker-hip-recall-faq/03/prweb10534731.htm
• http://injurylawyer-news.com/stryker-hip-replacement/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hip_replacement
• https://www.slideshare.net/goose575/analysis-of-stryker-rejuvenate-recall-from-hip-defect-lawyers

Jonathan Rosenfeld is a personal injury attorney based in Chicago, IL and is a regular contributor to our blog. He can be reached as follows:

— Jonathan Rosenfeld Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers 33 North Dearborn Street Suite 1930 Chicago, IL 60602

(847) 835-8895 Fax: (847) 572-1331 Toll Free: (888) 424-5757

Rosenfeldinjurylawyers.com jonathan@rosenfeldinjurylawyers.com

Introduction: The Uninsured Driver Problem in California

If you have been injured in a car accident in Los Angeles or anywhere in Southern California, one of the first questions your attorney will ask is whether the other driver had auto insurance. Unfortunately, the answer is often “no” — or worse, the at-fault driver simply fled the scene. California consistently ranks among the states with the highest rates of uninsured motorists in the nation, and the consequences for injured victims can be devastating.

According to industry data, roughly one in every seven drivers on California roads carries no auto liability insurance whatsoever. In densely populated urban areas like Los Angeles, Long Beach, and the San Fernando Valley, that figure can be even higher. For accident victims, this creates an immediate and frightening problem: if the person who caused your injuries has no insurance, who pays your medical bills, your lost wages, and your pain and suffering?

This article explains California law as it applies to accidents involving uninsured drivers — including your legal rights, the insurance coverages that may protect you, the legal process for pursuing compensation, and why having an experienced Los Angeles personal injury attorney in your corner can make all the difference.

California’s Mandatory Auto Insurance Requirements

California Vehicle Code Section 16020 requires every driver to maintain financial responsibility — typically in the form of automobile liability insurance — at all times while operating a vehicle on public roads. Effective January 1, 2025, California significantly increased its minimum liability insurance limits for the first time since 1967, pursuant to Senate Bill 1107 (the Protect California Drivers Act). The current minimum required liability insurance under California law is:

• $30,000 for bodily injury or death to one person
• $60,000 for bodily injury or death to more than one person per accident
• $15,000 for property damage

These are often written as 30/60/15 coverage limits — a major upgrade from the prior 15/30/5 minimums that had been in place since 1967. SB 1107 also includes a built-in escalator: limits will increase again in 2035 to $50,000/$100,000/$25,000. It is important to understand that even the new minimums are frequently inadequate to fully compensate a victim in a serious accident. That said, when a driver has no insurance at all, even minimum coverage would have been better than nothing.

Driving without insurance in California is illegal. Under Vehicle Code Section 16029, an uninsured driver who is caught faces fines, vehicle impoundment, and suspension of their driver’s license. But penalties imposed on the at-fault driver do nothing to compensate an innocent injury victim for their losses.

What Happens If You Are Hit by an Uninsured Driver?

When the at-fault driver has no insurance, your options for recovery depend largely on your own insurance policy and the specific facts of the accident. Here is an overview of the paths available to California accident victims:

1. Uninsured Motorist (UM) Coverage

The most important protection available to California drivers is Uninsured Motorist (UM) coverage. Under California Insurance Code Section 11580.2, every automobile insurance policy issued or delivered in California must include uninsured motorist bodily injury coverage unless the named insured rejects it in writing.

This means that if you have an auto insurance policy in California, you almost certainly have UM coverage — unless you explicitly signed a waiver declining it. UM coverage steps into the shoes of the at-fault uninsured driver and compensates you for:

• Medical expenses (past and future)
• Lost wages and loss of earning capacity
• Pain and suffering
• Emotional distress
• Other economic and non-economic damages

UM claims are filed with your own insurance company, but make no mistake — your insurer is not necessarily on your side. Insurance companies have a financial incentive to minimize what they pay, even on UM claims where their own policyholder is the victim. Having a

Having a skilled Los Angeles car accident attorney negotiate on your behalf is essential to ensuring that your UM claim is fully and fairly valued.

2. Underinsured Motorist (UIM) Coverage

Underinsured Motorist (UIM) coverage applies when the at-fault driver has some insurance, but their policy limits are too low to fully compensate you for your injuries. Like UM coverage, UIM coverage is required to be offered with California auto policies under Insurance Code Section 11580.2 and applies when the other driver’s liability limits are exhausted.

For example, if the at-fault driver carries the current minimum $30,000 in bodily injury liability coverage but your medical bills alone exceed $150,000, your UIM coverage would kick in — up to the limits of your own policy — to help cover the gap.

3. Medical Payments (MedPay) Coverage

Medical Payments coverage, commonly called MedPay, is an optional coverage that pays for your medical expenses regardless of who was at fault. It is not as broad as UM/UIM coverage but can be a useful first line of defense for covering immediate medical bills while your claim is being resolved.

4. Collision Coverage

If you have collision coverage on your own policy, it will pay to repair or replace your vehicle regardless of whether the other driver was insured. You will typically need to pay your deductible, but your insurer may then attempt to recover that cost from the at-fault driver through a process called subrogation.

5. Suing the Uninsured Driver Personally

You always have the right to file a personal injury lawsuit directly against the uninsured driver. However, practical realities often make this a limited remedy. Many uninsured drivers lack insurance precisely because they lack the financial resources to pay for damages. Obtaining a judgment against someone with no assets or income — sometimes called a “judgment-proof” defendant — may leave you with a piece of paper but no actual compensation.

That said, individual circumstances vary widely. Some uninsured drivers own property, have bank accounts, or have wages that can be garnished. An experienced attorney can help assess whether a direct lawsuit is worth pursuing in your specific case.

The “Uninsured Motorist” Claim Process in California

Filing a UM or UIM claim with your own insurer involves a process that is very different from a standard third-party insurance claim. Here is what California accident victims typically experience:

Step 1: Report the Accident and Notify Your Insurer

You must notify your insurance company of the accident as soon as reasonably possible. Failure to provide timely notice can jeopardize your UM claim. Provide the basic facts of the accident but avoid making recorded statements or signing any documents without consulting an attorney first.

Step 2: Confirm the Other Driver’s Uninsured Status

Your insurer will likely investigate whether the at-fault driver truly had no insurance. This typically involves contacting the other driver, reviewing the police report, and running database checks. In hit-and-run cases, there are special rules — discussed below.

Step 3: Gather and Document Your Damages

As with any personal injury claim, building a strong UM/UIM case requires comprehensive documentation of your injuries and losses, including:

• All medical records and billing statements
• Photographs of injuries, vehicle damage, and the accident scene
• Police accident report
• Witness statements
• Employment records showing lost wages
• Expert opinions for future medical care or lost earning capacity

If you suffered serious injuries such as a traumatic brain injury or spinal cord damage, obtaining comprehensive medical documentation is especially critical to establishing the full value of your claim.

Step 4: Negotiate or Arbitrate the Claim

Unlike a lawsuit against a third party, California UM/UIM claims are typically resolved through negotiation with your insurer, and if no agreement is reached, through binding arbitration — not a jury trial. California Insurance Code Section 11580.2(f) mandates that uninsured motorist disputes be submitted to arbitration if the parties cannot agree on the amount of damages.

Arbitration can be advantageous in some respects — it is faster and less costly than full litigation — but it also means you will not have a jury of your peers deciding your case. The quality of your legal representation and the strength of your evidence are critical in arbitration.

Hit-and-Run Accidents and UM Coverage in California

A hit-and-run accident — where the at-fault driver flees the scene without stopping — is treated similarly to an uninsured motorist accident under California law. Your UM coverage can be used for hit-and-run claims, but there are specific requirements that must be met.

Under Insurance Code Section 11580.2(b)(2), a hit-and-run claim generally requires that:

• The accident was reported to law enforcement within 24 hours (or as soon as practicable)
• The claimant or a witness can confirm actual physical contact between the hit-and-run vehicle and the insured’s vehicle or person (in most policy interpretations)
• The claimant filed a police or CHP report

The physical contact requirement can be a significant hurdle in hit-and-run cases where a driver ran you off the road without making contact. An attorney can help you evaluate whether your specific UM policy provides coverage even in non-contact situations, as some policies are more favorable on this point.

Proposition 213: The Uninsured Driver Penalty

One of the most important and often misunderstood aspects of California uninsured driver law is Proposition 213, passed by California voters in 1996. Proposition 213 is codified at California Civil Code Section 3333.4 and imposes a significant penalty on uninsured drivers who are injured in accidents — even if the other driver was at fault.

Under Proposition 213, an uninsured driver who is injured in a car accident generally cannot recover non-economic damages (such as pain and suffering and emotional distress) from the at-fault party. They can still recover their actual economic losses — medical bills, lost wages, and property damage — but the law strips away the right to compensation for non-economic losses.

This penalty applies to:

• The driver of an uninsured vehicle (except in certain DUI-related accidents where the other driver was convicted of DUI)
• The registered owner of an uninsured vehicle

There are limited exceptions. For example, Proposition 213 does not apply if the at-fault driver was convicted of DUI in connection with the accident. It also does not apply to pedestrians, cyclists, or passengers who did not own or operate the uninsured vehicle.

The practical lesson for California drivers is clear: carrying auto insurance is not just a legal obligation — it is also a matter of protecting your own right to full compensation if you are ever injured through no fault of your own.

How Much Is an Uninsured Motorist Claim Worth?

The value of a UM or UIM claim in California depends on the same factors that determine the value of any personal injury case: the nature and severity of your injuries, the extent of your medical treatment, the impact on your ability to work, and the effect of the accident on your quality of life.

Key factors that affect UM/UIM claim values include:

• Severity of injuries — catastrophic injuries such as spinal cord damage, TBIs, or amputations result in significantly higher recoveries than soft-tissue injuries
• Total medical expenses, including projected future medical costs
• Lost income and diminished earning capacity
• Pain, suffering, and emotional distress
• The limits of your own UM/UIM policy — you cannot recover more from your UM coverage than the policy’s per-person limit

This last point deserves emphasis. If you carry $100,000 in UM/UIM coverage and your damages are actually worth $300,000, you are limited to $100,000 from your UM claim (you may still pursue the uninsured driver personally for the remainder). This is why personal injury attorneys strongly recommend that California drivers carry UM/UIM coverage limits as high as they can afford.

For serious or catastrophic injuries, speaking with a catastrophic injury attorney in Los Angeles is strongly recommended. The stakes are simply too high to navigate the claim process without experienced legal representation.

Wrongful Death Claims Involving Uninsured Drivers

When an accident caused by an uninsured driver results in a fatality, the victim’s family may have a wrongful death claim under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 377.60. Eligible claimants include the deceased’s surviving spouse, children, and others who were financially dependent on the decedent.

In a wrongful death case involving an uninsured at-fault driver, the same rules apply: your own UM coverage may be available to compensate surviving family members, subject to the policy’s limits. California Insurance Code Section 11580.2 extends UM coverage to claims arising from the death of an insured as a result of an accident involving an uninsured motor vehicle.

Wrongful death cases are among the most complex and emotionally difficult claims in personal injury law. The combination of grieving family members, complicated insurance coverage issues, and the financial uncertainty of dealing with an uninsured defendant makes having experienced legal counsel absolutely essential.

Special Situations: Commercial Vehicles, Rideshare, and Delivery Drivers

The uninsured driver problem is not limited to ordinary passenger vehicles. California has seen a significant rise in accidents involving commercial vehicles, rideshare vehicles, and gig-economy delivery drivers. The insurance picture in these cases can be complicated.

Rideshare Accidents (Uber and Lyft)

California law requires Uber and Lyft to maintain significant liability insurance coverage for their drivers. However, the coverage that applies depends on whether the driver’s app was active at the time of the accident. If you were injured in a rideshare accident and the rideshare driver was uninsured or underinsured, the rideshare company’s own policy may provide coverage.

Truck and Commercial Vehicle Accidents

Commercial trucking companies are required under both state and federal law to carry significantly higher insurance limits than personal vehicle drivers. In a truck accident case involving an uninsured or underinsured owner-operator, the trucking company itself may bear liability as well.

Uninsured Motorcycle Riders

California motorcycle accident victims face similar challenges when the at-fault motorcyclist is uninsured. Your UM coverage typically extends to accidents caused by uninsured motorcyclists, but confirming the specific terms of your policy is important. See our resources on motorcycle accidents in Los Angeles for more information.

The Statute of Limitations for Uninsured Motorist Claims in California

Timing is critical in California personal injury cases. The general statute of limitations for a personal injury claim based on negligence is two years from the date of the accident, under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 335.1.

For UM/UIM claims, however, the deadline may be governed by your own insurance policy as well. Many policies require that a UM/UIM demand or lawsuit be filed within a specific period — sometimes as short as one year from the date of the accident, or within a set period after the third-party claim is resolved. California courts have scrutinized unreasonably short contractual limitations periods, but failing to act within your policy’s deadline can result in the loss of your claim.

Additionally, if a government entity owned or maintained the road where the accident occurred and that entity’s negligence contributed to the crash, you may have only six months to file a government tort claim under the California Government Claims Act (Government Code Section 911.2).

Why You Need a Personal Injury Attorney After an Uninsured Driver Accident

Dealing with an uninsured driver accident in California is not a straightforward process. Between deciphering your own insurance policy, understanding Proposition 213’s implications, navigating UM arbitration procedures, and evaluating whether a lawsuit against the driver is worthwhile, there are many moving parts — and plenty of opportunities for insurance companies to take advantage of an unrepresented claimant.

Here is what an experienced Los Angeles personal injury attorney can do for you:

• Identify all potential sources of compensation — including UM/UIM coverage, MedPay, health insurance subrogation issues, and potential direct claims
• Handle all communications with your insurance company to prevent you from saying something that could be used to minimize your claim
• Build a comprehensive record of your injuries and damages, including expert testimony on future medical needs and lost earning capacity
• Negotiate aggressively with your insurer for full and fair compensation
• Represent you effectively in UM arbitration proceedings
• Advise you on whether suing the uninsured driver personally is a viable option

At Steven M. Sweat, Personal Injury Lawyers, APC, we have represented injured Californians in uninsured and underinsured motorist cases for over 30 years. We handle these cases on a contingency fee basis — meaning you pay no attorney’s fees unless and until we recover compensation for you. To learn more about how we handle automobile accident cases in Los Angeles and throughout Southern California, contact our office for a free consultation.

Frequently Asked Questions: Uninsured Driver Accidents in California

Conclusion: Protecting Your Rights After an Uninsured Driver Accident in California

California’s roads are filled with uninsured drivers, and the legal landscape for victims is complex. But being hit by an uninsured driver does not have to mean going uncompensated. California law — including mandatory UM coverage provisions, the right to pursue an uninsured driver personally, and a well-established body of insurance and personal injury law — provides meaningful avenues for recovery.

The key is acting quickly, understanding your options, and having the right legal team in your corner. An experienced California personal injury attorney can evaluate your insurance coverages, maximize your claim’s value, and fight for every dollar you deserve.

If you or a loved one has been injured by an uninsured driver in Los Angeles or anywhere in Southern California, contact the law offices of Steven M. Sweat, Personal Injury Lawyers, APC for a free, no-obligation consultation. Call us at 866-966-5240 or visit us at victimslawyer.com. We are here to help.

Disclaimer: This blog post is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you have been injured in an accident, you should consult a qualified personal injury attorney for advice specific to your situation.