San Francisco Injury Lawyer Blog

A person in a wheelchair suffered life-threatening injuries Saturday morning after being hit by a pickup truck in a South of Market intersection, San Francisco police said. Most drivers on Harrison waited for the wheelchair to cross, but the driver of a Toyota pickup truck pulled forward and struck the victim, who was in the closest crosswalk, according to one report. People in a crosswalk have the right-of-way even when the light for cross-traffic turns green. Both drivers and walkers need to obey traffic laws to avoid stiff penalties. Motorists who fail to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk can face a $212 fine. Likewise, pedestrians who cross against a red light can be issued a $108 citation. To avoid accidents, drivers should avoid using cell phones to talk or text while driving, and pedestrians should look for cars even when they have the right-of-way. CC Section 21950 describes pedestrian right-of way:

21950. (a) The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.
(b) This section does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of using due care for his or her safety. No pedestrian may suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in a marked or unmarked crosswalk.
(c) The driver of a vehicle approaching a pedestrian within any marked or unmarked crosswalk shall exercise all due care and shall reduce the speed of the vehicle or take any other action relating to the operation of the vehicle as necessary to safeguard the safety of the pedestrian.
(d) Subdivision (b) does not relieve a driver of a vehicle from the duty of exercising due care for the safety of any pedestrian within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.

The SOMA district where the accident occurred is notorious for its dangerous intersections and has the highest incidents of fatalities and injuries. The injury that happened Saturday is a good example of how dangerous our intersections are. Have you notice how many of SOMA’s streets look and feel like four lane mini freeways? And doesn’t it feel like you are risking your life trying to cross them? I can’t tell you the number of times I have seen pedestrians begin to cross at an intersection and then have to turn around and head back to the curb because light changed to quickly or because a car was speeding through the intersection. At the same time, as a driver, I have had to slam on the brakes many times in order to avoid hitting someone who walked into the middle of a busy SOMA street without looking. Whether you travel by foot or car, navigating San Francisco requires care and vigilance for the sake of pedestrians, especially the disabled.

Pedestrian safety in the SOMA district gets a lot of lip service for the fact that it does have some of the most dangerous intersections. A 2007 SFMTA Collision Report studied the number of intersection auto collisions with pedestrians and cyclists and found that six of the ten intersections with the most collisions are located in this district. The reason this seems to be so, in our minds, is because most streets in SOMA connect drivers who want to enter and exit local freeways. As such, SOMA’s streets have many speeding cars and large trucks, which are not compatible with pedestrians. Also, the booming development of housing and business in that area has caused its population to grow, along with that the area has seen a rise in accidents. Sadly, pedestrians are often hit in this thriving district as drivers negligently travel toward their destinations. But don’t forget accidents can occur when a pedestrian is distracted—and that pedestrian safety is a two-way street!.

Continue reading " Disabled Person Seriously Injured in San Francisco Intersection " »

As we reported earlier today, a parolee fled in a pickup truck yesterday after Concord police tried to stop him for talking on a cell phone crashed into a car and killed the driver. More information has just been released on the accident. At around 6 p.m. yesterday an officer saw a man in a white pickup truck talking on his cell phone without the required hands-free device and tried to pull him over, according to reports.

The man, who has been identified as Mauro Gutierrez, age 25, of Concord refused to stop, which caused the officer to pursue him by chasing him. Tragically, the pursuit ended when Gutierrez crashed into a 1985 BMW on Solano Way near Highway 242. The man driving the BMW died as a result of the crash. Gutierrez then exited his car and fled on foot and was apprehended and arrested a short time later. He was booked at Contra Costa County Jail in Martinez on suspicion of manslaughter, being a felon in possession of a firearm (as a gun was found in his truck), evading arrest, causing great bodily injury or death, vehicle theft and obstructing police.A gun was found in the truck, authorities said. The case is under investigation by police and the Contra Costa County district attorney's office and the driver's death will also be the subject of a coroner's inquest.

It turns out the news of innocent motorists being killed in accidents caused by suspects being chased by the police is nothing out of the ordinary. Recently, throughout the Bay Area, places like Berkeley, El Sobrante, Hayward and San Francisco have become familiar with this kind of tragedy. Most law-enforcement agencies allow officers to chase suspects in stolen cars or those wanted for serious crimes. According to Concord police, it was unclear why Gutierrez allegedly fled when they tried to stop him. They investigated details of the chase, including how long it lasted and how fast the suspect was going, and it appears the officer acted within policy. Lt. Darrell Graham stated to the media, "When people choose to flee from the police, it sets into motion a very unpredictable and potentially set of circumstances. Our sympathies go out to the victim and his family."

This would be a good time to point out the public safety issue of police pursuits, as they are a major threat to anyone on the road—including pedestrians and bicyclists. According to statistics nearly one in four chases statewide ends in a crash—something to be hyper aware of because they occur hourly. So a crash as result of a police chase could happen potentially every day. After an unrelated incident earlier this month, Police Chief Al Franz of the San Diego Police Department told the media that police chases are the most dangerous things they do. Remember that next time you head out the door to you next destination, especially if you hear a police siren.

Continue reading " Bay Area Police Pursuit Ends in Death of Innocent Bystander " »

Cell phones are all but unavoidable in the United States these days. People use their cell phones while walking down the street, in stores, and while driving. Talking on the phone while driving is the subject of much debate. Many safety experts insist that drivers using cell phones invite accidents. Others insist that talking on the phone while driving is no more dangerous than playing with the radio or talking to a passenger in the back of the car. Nevertheless, many states, including California, have strict laws regarding the use of cell phones by motor vehicle drivers. Still, as our San Francisco car accident attorney has experienced, the use of cell phones can be an integral part of a legal battle after a San Francisco car accident. An accident that occurred in Concord last night may an example of that conflict.

As the San Francisco Chronicle reported this morning, one driver was killed last night when a driver using a cell phone crashed into his car. The events began around 6pm Tuesday night when the Concord police saw a man in a white pickup truck conversing on a cell phone without a required hands-free device. The officer attempted to pull the driver over, but instead of stopping, the truck driver led the police officer on a chase. The chase ended when the truck hit a BMW on Solana Way, near Highway 242. The driver of the BMW died as a result of the collision. Police chased the pickup truck driver on foot and apprehended him. Officials have not released the name of either man.

Scenarios like this are ripe for lawsuits, because much neglect and reckless was involved. Not only was the driver of the pickup truck violating the law when used his phone without a hands-free device, but he likely violated several traffic laws during the police chase. While any criminal charges would have be filed by the Contra Costa County’s district attorney’s office, surviving family members can file a civil suit against the truck driver.

One frequently used legal tool in cases like this is wrongful death action. A wrongful death claim allows surviving family members to collect damages, or money, to compensate them for the death. For example, the family can try to recover financial support to make up for the salary the deceased would have earned. A successful suit can also cover funeral expenses and the value of household services the late family member would have performed. In some instances, family members can also recover for noneconomic damages, such as loss of companionship.

When family members face the death of a loved one, contacting a lawyer is typically not high on their list of priorities. But finding legal representation sooner rather than later can be important since wrongful death actions have a statute of limitations. With some exceptions, a suit must be filed before the second anniversary of the person’s death.

Continue reading " San Francisco Innocent Bystander Killed After Cell Phone Prompts Car Chase " »

Most people who live in a city have rented an apartment at one time or another. Apartment living is often accompanied by some annoyances. Many renters can share stories about bad experiences in an apartment - from the occasional unwanted mouse to the loud landlord who is constantly renovating other units in the building to an apartment with a broken elevator. The ultimate apartment hardship, however, is being evicted. As our San Francisco apartment lawyer knows, our area has its share of landlord-tenant conflicts. Recently one of San Francisco’s older residents experienced the ultimate rental nightmare, eviction.

As The New York Times reported, 75-year-old Ernesto Hernandez was recently forced out of his apartment by the building’s new owner. Mr. Hernandez had lived in a rent-controlled apartment on Green Street for almost 30 years. He moved into the building in 1982 to live with Richard Whalen, who had already lived there for years. In 2005, the building was sold and purchased by Paul Marino. Mr. Whalen died several years later, and Mr. Hernandez continued to live in the apartment alone.

The original lease had long expired, so Mr. Hernandez rented month to month. State law permits a landlord to institute “house rules” when a tenant is renting month to month. According to the state law, a tenant must comply with the new rule within 30 days. But San Francisco’s local ordinance requires that all parties must agree on the new rule before it goes into effect. Despite the local ordinance, Mr. Marino instituted a new rule that banned subletting. Mr. Hernandez ignored the rule, subletting space in the apartment. After a legal battle that included an appeal, Mr. Hernandez lost. He now lives in downtown hotel for seniors.

San Francisco landlord-tenant conflicts are all too common. Because of chronic housing shortages in the area and an increase in the number of tech jobs, many landlords are tempted to create new rules to drive out rent-controlled tenants, and other tenants paying below market rent. The court decision in Mr. Hernandez’s case shows that landlords have significant legal protection, despite claims to the contrary. Still, San Francisco landlord-tenant law protects renters from unreasonable landlords. For example, building owners must keep rental units in a condition fit for human occupancy, including keeping plumbing and electricity in good working condition. Apartments must also be free of vermin at the time they are rented. And landlords cannot evict tenants themselves, but must use the legal process to remove them.

Continue reading " 75 Year Old San Francisco Man Evicted from Apartment " »

Quite often, serious accidents are the final and tragic result of a long chain of events consisting of bad luck and small mistakes. When many factors contributed to the accident, determining the most important cause of the accident can be a daunting task for a San Francisco car accident attorney. In other cases, it can be obvious what caused the accident, but determining who is more responsible for the mishap can be a challenge. For example, in a recent San Francisco car accident, two drivers bear some responsibility for a collision that injured both drivers and six passengers.

Last night, as described in an article in the Mercury, there was a two car accident. At 12:39 am a minivan broadsided a car in San Francisco’s South of Market neighborhood, at the intersection of 10th and Howard streets. The sedan was stopped a red light when the speeding van ran a red light and struck the car. In addition to the driver, the sedan contained five passengers, while the van had two occupants. All eight individuals were taken to local hospitals for serious injuries. Everyone is expected to recover fully.

For the drivers, however, the event did not end with a trip to the hospital. When police arrived
on the scene, they arrested both drivers. Officials suspected that both had been driving while intoxicated. In addition, police arrested one of the van’s passengers for possession of cocaine. Officials are also investigating whether or not the van was involved in a hit-and-run accident earlier in the evening.

After accidents like this, injured parties are often reluctant to seek legal advice. Many people believe that if they contributed to the events that injured them, such as getting into car with a driver who had been drinking, the legal system will not help them. Depending on the facts of the specific situation, however, contributing to the accident is not always an absolute bar to legal recovery. Traditionally, under the theory of contributory negligence, defendants who had a role in causing an accident could not sue the plaintiff and recover.

But today, in most state, including California, contributory negligence is no longer the rule. Instead, comparative negligence governs lawsuits. Under the comparative negligence system, plaintiff who played a role in causing an accident can recover in a lawsuit, but their recovery is limited by the amount of their fault. So if a passenger was 15% at fault for getting into the car with an intoxicated driver and damages are determined to be $10,000, the plaintiff will only receive $8,500. So the plaintiff will not recover his or her full damages, but could still collect a significant amount of money.

Continue reading " Eight People Injured in Midnight San Francisco Car Accident " »

Last week, an Amtrak train traveling 15-20 mph crashed into a train unlading passengers at an Oakland station injuring 17 people, all whom suffered only minor and non-life-threatening injuries, according to reports. The crash happened around 10pm on Wednesday, October 12th and victims were taken to local hospitals. A train went through a red light and hit a stationary train. At the time of the crash the wheels of each lead engine went off the track. According to one report, an Amtrak representative state that the moving train should have never continued past the red signal because that signal is the equivalent to a red light.
Amtrak and the owner of the tracks, Union Pacific Freight Railroad, will monst likely work with federal officials to investigate the crash. After any train accident many important questions must be answered. Was the conductor negligent or the train company? Were the brakes not working properly? Was the conductor negligent in operating the train? Was he under the influence of any drugs or alcohol or did have any intent to cause the accident? In this particular case it is doubtful that negligence has anything to do with lack of training. What training do you need to know to stop at a red signal? But you never know. The fact is that proving mere negligence here is not a problem, but it might to prove anything more than that, such as proving reckless disregard of the safety of the passengers. State of mind of the conductor will most probably be examined.

Luckily none of the injuries suffered in this particular accident were catastrophic. Often train accidents involve serious injuries and even fatalities. When that does happen, victims and their surviving family members may be eligible to file a claim for compensation. After such an accident, victims and their families should contact a knowledgeable attorney with experience handling claims against public entities such as Amtrak. Anyone who has suffered an injury after being involved in a train accident should contact our experienced train accident attorney who can inform them of their rights. Also, anyone who has suffered an injury significant enough to cause them to see a doctor, take time off work, pay medical bills, go through lengthy pain and suffering, and seek physical rehabilitation, could find relief by hiring our personal injury attorney to file a claim on their behalf.
If you or a loved one suffered injuries due to being involved in a train accident and would like information on how to protect your rights, please immediately call our firm. Our expert train accident attorney works on a contingency fee basis, which means we are paid after we obtain a recovery for our clients. If we do not obtain a recovery, then our clients owe us nothing. It is important to note that your legal rights will be fully protected by our law firm. With over 10 years’ experience filing claims and lawsuits against public entities such as Amtrak, our firm will work competently and aggressively to get you the compensation you deserve.

Traffic is a part of life for those of us who live in a dense urban area. In addition to be annoying and frustrating for those who are stuck in it, as our San Francisco car accident attorney knows, it can often be a symptom of a much more serious problem. The gridlock encountered by many who were driving on the 101 on Wednesday morning was a sad reminder that traffic can be more than just a headache for drivers – it can mean a serious injury or loss of life for those involved in the traffic-causing accident.

As the San Francisco Gate reported, all southbound lanes of 101 were closed for several hours Wednesday morning due to a fiery crash. The accident occurred around 5 am, when big-rig carrying cement overturned and caught fire. Several other cars were involved in the accident. One woman who was forced to stop pulled the truck driver out of the vehicle. The truck driver was then taken to San Francisco General Hospital. His condition is currently unknown. It is also unclear if any other drivers were harmed.

Before the highway was reopened, officials had to ensure that all debris had been cleared and that the road was structurally sound. This entailed removing the truck from the road and cleaning up all spilled fuel. In addition, Caltrans engineers were brought in to inspect the elevated freeway and guardrails before the traffic was allowed on the road.

In accidents like this, it is not always clear who is at fault, but those involved can benefit from seeking advice from a San Francisco truck accident lawyer. Investigations can take time and victims may not initially have enough information to determine if a negligence suit is appropriate. But experienced truck crash attorneys know that depending on the nature of items being transported, and what occurred, a variety of liability theories are possible.

For example, if a truck crashes which was carrying certain material, an ultra hazardous activity suit may be appropriate. Ultra hazardous activity liability differs from a negligence liability in that the level of care does not matter. In order to find a breach of duty in a negligence claim, the plaintiff must show that the defendant did not take the proper precautions. In contrast, in an ultra hazardous activity claim, the level of care taken is immaterial. No matter how careful the defendant was, if explosives, radioactive materials or wild animals were involved, the defendant can be strictly liable. For example, imagine the case of a truck driver transporting explosives. If the truck is rear-ended and catches fire, the driver may still responsible for the damages, even if he was not responsible for causing the accident, because the activity of transporting explosives is so dangerous.

Continue reading " Fiery San Francisco Truck Accident on 101 Closes Road Wednesday Morning " »

Most people know that they are more likely be injured in a car accident than virtually any other type of accident. Despite that knowledge, many people are much more afraid of other types of mishaps. Plane crashes, for example, are a common phobia. Besides car and plan accidents, rarely do most community members give much thought to other types of transportation injuries. However, the truth is that accidents can strike whenever one is moving about. For example, while not an everyday occurrence, train crashes can have damaging consequences for passengers and bystanders. Luckily, in a recent San Francisco train accident, the results were alarming but not deadly.

As the Mercury News reported, at least seventeen individuals were injured last Wednesday night when two Amtrak trains collided. The trains involved were the Amtrak Coast Starlight train, which runs from Los Angeles to Seattle, and the southbound San Joaquin train, which runs from Bakersfield to Oakland. The two trains had a combined total of about 150 passengers. It appears that the accident occurred when the San Joaquin train went through a red light and hit the stopped Coast Starlight train. It was traveling about 20 miles per hour when the crash happened. Most of the injuries appear to by minor, though several passengers were sent to the hospital. At least 45 Oakland firefighters responded, as well as numerous police officers and other emergency personnel. Amtrak and Federal Railroad Administration officials are investigating the cause of the accident.

Whenever a local community member is injured in an accident caused by the negligence of another, it is often worthwhile to seek out the aid of a San Francisco injury lawyer. The attorney can explain how the law of negligence might apply in their particular case. For example, in a train injury like this one, the negligence principle of res ipsa loquitur might apply. Translated from the Latin, the phrase means “the thing speaks for itself.” In other words, the principle means that the accident itself is proof of negligence.

In a negligence case, the plaintiff must show that the defendant had a duty of care and breached that duty of care. In some circumstances, however, the plaintiff may not know the details of what happened, making it hard to prove that there was a breach of duty. Res ipsa loquitur allows the plaintiff to show that no matter the details, the accident would have never occurred had it not been for the defendant’s negligence. One famous example involves an accident outside a warehouse, where a barrel fell from a second story window, injuring a pedestrian. Barrels typically do not fall out of windows without assistance, so the plaintiff was able to prove that the barrel owners had breached their duty of care because they had allowed a barrel to fall out of the warehouse. Similarly, the victims of the recent San Francisco train accident may be able to show that trains typically do not crash into each other; the accident is proof enough of negligence.

Continue reading " San Francisco Train Accident Sends Several to Hospital " »

Home should be a place where people can be safe, enjoy time with their family, and relax. For too many individuals, however, home is a place filled with potential hazards. This can be especially true for apartment dwellers. Our San Francisco injury attorney has seen many accidents arising from defects in apartment buildings. In San Francisco’s urban environment, many residents encounter problems with dangerous items that are not promptly fixed by building owners. Many of these potentially dangerous items, from water heaters to windows, are beyond the control of the tenant. Despite the fact that renters often inform their landlords of problems that need to be fixed, these requests often go ignored. Common areas, such as entryways, are another source of trouble.

One recent even highlights the dangers often faced by those in their own living space. One of our area’s reality television stars was recently injured in a San Francisco apartment building accident. As MSNBC reported, “The Biggest Loser” contestant Sam Poueu was seriously hurt when he fell off the roof of a four story building at the beginning of September. According to family members, he was attempting to climb down the fire escape after he was locked on the roof of a friend’s apartment. He suffered injuries including damage to his pelvic region, a punctured lung, torn ligaments and a broken leg.

The landlord in this case may not have known that the door to the roof had a problem. Without notice that a tenant or guest could be trapped on the roof, the building owner may not have legal responsibility for an injury caused when a visitor trapped on the roof tried to climb down. In another situation, however, where the landlord was aware that tenants had been locked on the roof before, the landlord might be liable.

Under the traditional rules of landlord-tenant law, landlords have a duty to ensure that common areas are well-maintained. In a lobby, this means the area must be well lit and doors should be secured with working locks. In a building where tenants can use the roof, users should be able to easily enter and exit the roof and safety devices should be in place to keep individuals from accidentally falling off. In the instance where a problem develops, such as a broken light fixture, the landlord has a reasonable amount of time to remedy the problem. If the problem is not corrected within a reasonable period, the landlord can be liable for any subsequent injuries that are caused by the defect.

Continue reading " Reality TV Star Recovering from Falling In San Francisco Apartment Accident " »

Our San Francisco car accident attorney knows that motor vehicle accidents come in all shapes and sizes. Perhaps the most typical accident involves two cars that collide into each other. But crashes involving just one car occur on a regular basis as well. Depending on what the car hits, the results can be extremely serious. When a car hits a pedestrian, especially a young child, the potential for heartbreak is even greater.

Fortunately, it appears that the child victim of a recent San Francisco pedestrian accident will recover. As was recently reported in the Mercury News, an eight year old boy was hospitalized after he was struck by a car in the Western Addition neighborhood of San Francisco. The accident took place at around 3:45 pm last Friday afternoon at the intersection of Laguna and Turk streets. The youngster was crossing the street when he was struck by a car. The driver stop to assist and the boy was taken to San Francisco General Hospital. His injuries are not considered life-threatening. Police are investigating the accident.

In incidents like this, depending on the results of the investigation, a lawsuit may not be warranted. But in the event that the analysis of the accident shows that the driver failed to take proper precautions, the victim and his family may decide to file a negligence suit. A negligence suit is a classic example of a civil suit. In a civil suit, the case is initiated by a private party. This is in contrast to a criminal suit, which is always initiated by the government.

In addition to having different initiators, civil and criminal suits have different punishments. A defendant in a criminal case can end up in jail but a defendant in a civil case is only required to pay monetary damages. But civil and criminal suits have many similarities. The violation of a law can be critical in both. For example, if a pedestrian is hit because a driver was speeding, the driver can be found criminally liable for breaking the law. Evidence of speeding can also be used in a civil case. Speeding can be per se evidence of negligence. In layperson’s terms, the fact that someone broke the law can be automatic evidence that they violated the duty of care, an essential element of all negligence suits.

Continue reading " Boy Injured in Street in San Francisco Pedestrian Accident " »

For most Americans, getting in a car is an everyday activity. Most individuals drive to work in the morning, home in the evening and use their car to run errands. Since driving is such a common place activity for most people, we often forgot how dangerous it traveling on our roadways can actually be. Consequently, many drivers are not as cautious as they should be. But as our San Francisco car accident attorney knows, deadly car accidents are a much too frequent occurrence, especially here in a dense urban area.

Brandon Solem, a 33 year old man and San Francisco resident, recently died after his car rear-ended another vehicle in the area around the University of San Francisco. As The Examiner reported, the accident occurred last Thursday, just past midnight at the intersection of Fulton and Stanyan streets. Mr. Solem was driving west on Fulton street when he hit another car that was stopped at a red light. The impact was enough to cause the other car to turn over. Both drivers were taken to San Francisco General Hospital. Mr. Solem’s injuries were severe, and he died several hours later. The other driver, a 27 year old woman, is expected to survive. Police are still investigating the cause of the accident and additional details are not yet available.

At first glance the situation seems clear enough; a car did not stop for a red light, causing an accident. But an investigation will explain the “how” and “why” of the accident, not just the “what.” Understanding all the circumstances surrounding this crash and other San Francisco car accidents is critical.. Details can often mean the difference between a successful lawsuit and an unsuccessful one. For example, if one party was driving drunk the legal repercussion are very different from a case where the party was unable to stop because of defective breaks. Knowing if any laws were broken is also significant.

Generally, in order to hold the opposing side liable for the consequences of the accident, legal negligence rules require that the plaintiff show the defendant had a duty and breached that duty. In some instances, however, a violation of a law, such as the failure to stop at a red light, can be prima facie evidence of negligence. In other words, evidence that a law was broken means that the plaintiff can satisfy the first hurdle in a lawsuit without going through each individual step. Rather than requiring the plaintiff to show all the elements of his or her case, a prima facie case allows the plaintiff to move forward automatically and puts the burden on the defendant to rebut the charges.

Continue reading " Rear-End Collision in USF Area Ends in Death for One Driver " »

Our Sacramento car accident attorney knows that collisions involving children are some of the most heart-stopping incidents that strike on our area roadways. The potential for serious injury is highest when it involves a child who is hit while walking and not in another car. For example, late last week a young ten year old boy was hit by a FedEx truck while in the road near his school. KCRA News reported on the Sacramento pedestrian accident which occurred around 1:30 p.m. just outside the Beitzel Elementary School. According to the report the FedEx truck was heading north on Caymus Drive and was preparing to make a left turn on Chantel Way when his delivery truck struck the ten year old child.

Authorities are still investigating the situation to understand exactly what happened. The driver of the truck claims that he did not see the child enter the road. Apparently the child was struck by the side of the truck and thrown to the ground. The driver then proceeded forwarded being unaware of the child’s position, the rear wheels of the truck eventually ran over the boy on the ground. The child’s condition is still unclear, but it suspected that his pelvis was broken. The driver stopped at the scene and was questioned by authorities, though no citations have yet to be issued.

Our Sacramento pedestrian accident attorney has worked with many local residents who have been hurt in similar events. All cities have their fair share of these collisions, and unfortunately many of them could have been prevented if those behind the wheel had been acting in a reasonable manner. It is too early to determine any specific legal liability in this case, but it will be important for all those involved to ensure that the specific events which led up to the accidents are brought to light. Not every pedestrian accident is the fault of the driver, and it is imperative that all those walkers who are on or near the roadway conduct themselves in a reasonable manner as well.

While pedestrians are occasionally at fault themselves, it is important for all those involved in these events in our area to visit with a Sacramento car accident lawyer before making any decisions which may affect their legal rights. Victims of these crashes and their families may at first believe that there was nothing that could be done to prevent the accident, but an experienced legal professional is often capable of explaining exactly how the law might apply in their case. For example, most Sacramento truck accident lawsuits stemming from these events are filed under a negligence theory. In short, these suits are brought when a driver acted in an unreasonable way which caused injury to another person.

Many factors come into play when determining whether or not a driver was reasonable when the accident occurred. What may be reasonable conduct when driving in one situation may not be reasonable in another situation. Most community members would agree that driving a truck on a freeway demands different conduct when that same truck is being driven on a neighborhood street. In addition, even more care may be necessary when driving a truck in front of a school with children visible and near the area. All of those factors will come into play when determining how the law will apply in this and similar situations.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Outer Mission Pedestrian Accident Takes Life of San Francisco Man

New Crosswalk for a Dangerous San Francisco Intersection, and Other Issues Regarding Road Improvements

All big cities are filled with a hustle and bustle throughout the day as cars, bikes, trolleys, buses, and pedestrians move about the streets as residents go about their business. The energy created by so much activity is exactly what draws many people to these urban areas. However, our San Francisco pedestrian accident lawyer knows that it the commotion on our streets can also be dangerous for those caught up in traveling accidents. For too often local drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians suffer serious injuries or even death after crashes on and near our local roadways.

That appears to be what happened earlier this week to Sulpicio Jimenez, a 57-year old resident of San Francisco’s Outer Mission neighborhood. According to reports in the San Francisco Chronicle, the man was on foot crossing Mission Street near Excelsior Avenue shortly before seven in the evening when he was struck by a car. Local emergency crews rushed to the scene and the man was taken to a local hospital. However, there was little that could be done, and the man ultimately passed away from his injuries. Authorities are still investing this San Francisco car accident, and no arrests or other citations have been issued yet.

There are still too many unknowns about this latest tragedy to understand what legal issues might be involved. However, far too often drivers fail to recognize that they owe a duty of care to those pedestrians who are traveling nearby. Tens of thousands of pedestrians are injured or killed near roadways every year. More than other traveling incidents, San Francisco pedestrian accidents often involve particularly serious harm to those involved because walkers have no protection. A car does not have to be traveling very fast for it to cause immense damage to a pedestrian in its crosshairs.

The particular vulnerabilities of those who travel by foot are exactly why certain legal protections have been enacted by our legislature in an attempt to make our roadways safer for travelers. For example, it is illegal in our state to operate a car while using a cell phone. In addition, all drivers must yield the right of way to those in crosswalks, even when they are unmarked at an intersection. Drivers who violate these laws and hit those walking nearby are likely liable for the injuries that they cause. Our San Francisco car accident attorneys have worked on many cases where vehicles have negligently hit pedestrians. There are a wide variety of causes of these accidents, but upon close examination they can often be traced back to drivers who fail to abide by reasonable standard of care.

Most victims of these accidents and their families have a vague idea that they have a legal right to file a claim when another mistake led to their harm. However, many residents remain unsure about what they should do to protect those rights. To complicate things even more, insurance companies often get involved right away before some victims are able to determine what course of action is in their best interest. In virtually all cases it is beneficial to have seek the advice of a legal professional as soon as possible. There is no denying that the laws regarding pedestrian accidents can be confusing, and no local resident should go it alone.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

The Most Dangerous Places for Pedestrians in San Francisco

Strong San Francisco Pedestrian Advocacy Needed: One Pedestrian Death is One Too Many

The San Francisco wrongful death lawyers at our firm understand that no accidents are tougher on area families than those that take the life of a loved one. All losses are difficult, but there is something especially tragic about those deaths that are caused by the negligence of another. Far too frequently that misconduct involves improper driving on our area roadways. Deaths in traffic accidents remain one of the most common forms of fatal accidents. “Accidental” is a bit of misnomer, as most of these crashes can be traced back to unsafe and sometimes reckless conduct on the part of someone involved in the crash.

For example, CBS San Francisco reported last week on a tragic San Francisco bicycle accident that took the life of a local man. Fifty-seven year old Robert Eugene White of Ryde was killed on state Highway 113 when his bike was hit from behind on Sunday afternoon. Officials are still conducting investigations to figure out exactly what happened. However, as it now stands, investigators believe that the man was riding his bicycle northbound on the highway around two in the afternoon in an unincorporated part of Solano County. While peddling on the edge of the road a car driven by a twenty-one year old young man came up behind him. Authorities believe that the driver began to pass the bicyclist, but for reasons still undetermined, he swerved and actually hit Mr. White. As most would expect, Mr. White was thrown from his bike by the impact. He ultimately landed on the windshield of the car that hit him before ending up on the shoulder of the road. Unfortunately, as often happens when a bicyclist is hit by a speeding car, the man’s injuries were quite severe and he did not survive the collision.

It is tragic to hear about these preventable accidents. Sadly, events just like this occur all the time on roadways inside and outside the city. Many car and truck drivers fail to understand that they must share the road with cyclists. As a result, many bike riders fall victim just like the man in this latest accident. When this occurs, it is almost always a clear case of negligence. No driver who abides by reasonable standards of care when behind the wheel would hit a bicyclist while trying to pass him. The civil law is clear when it comes to sorting out liability in many of these accidents. Those who are harmed are able to hold the wrongdoer liable any time that wrongdoer owed a duty, breached that duty, and caused injury. All drivers owe a duty to fellow travelers, and that duty is breached causing injury when their vehicle strikes another.

Continue reading " Dixon Wrongful Death Caused By Medication Error " »

Our Sacramento nursing home abuse attorneys understand that local elder abuse and neglect occurs far more often than many area community members suspect. Not only that, but many long-term care facilities go to extreme lengths to cover up the poor care that they often provide to vulnerable seniors. For example, the Sacramento Bee recently published a series of stories explaining the widespread falsification of medical records undertaken by nursing home employees in an attempt to hide evidence of Sacramento elder neglect. State investigators continue to uncover stories of facilities throughout the area where patient information has been changed to make it appear that they received a satisfactory level of care, even though they did not. Fortunately, more and more family members of these victims are stepping up and demanding accountability.

While not always easy to catch, deceptive (and illegal) practices by these negligent facilities have been proven on a number of occasions. One supervisor at an area nursing home admitted that she was ordered to change a patient’s medical record to hide the fact that the man had died from severe bedsores caused by neglect. In another case, a deceased patient’s medical chart claimed that the resident received physical therapy sessions five times a week. However, nearly thirty of those documented sessions were supposedly led by nursing assistants who were not even at work at the time of the reported therapy. In yet another case a patient who died of neglect had a medical chart hurriedly produced with fake entries claiming check-ups from a nurse who did not even exist. The list of examples of these egregious attempts to hide Sacramento nursing home abuse goes on and on.

In many cases this information is modified after a resident has died from poor care in an attempt to evade legal liability for the inadequate treatment. However, in other cases, the false records are entered while patients are still alive—ultimately leading to deadly complications for the involved seniors. For example, sometimes patients are listed as showing no medical issues after a routine check-up that was never performed, causing residents who actually do have medical needs to fail to receive the emergency care they need. At other times a medication or treatment is charted before it is actually given. Cases have also been found of nursing home staff members who falsify consent forms so that residents can be illegally sedated or forge documents so that disagreements have to be settled through arbitration.

There is simply no excuse for any facility to tolerate sloppy record-keeping at these facilities. Of course all instances of intentional altering of records to avoid liability must be punished to the full extent possible—it is a crime to do so under California law. However, even record-keeping mistakes made out of sheer laziness can have life and death consequences. One 77-year old woman at the El Dorado Care Center in Placerville died after suffering fecal impaction. Her rectum was dilated a shocking 10 centimeters at the time of her death, but her medical chart claimed that she had several bowel movements in the previous days. Medical experts who examined the victim afterwards admitted that there was likely no way that the charts could have been accurate given her condition. Had the records been kept accurately and evaluated in a timely manner it is likely that the victim could have receive the care she needed before the medical problems killed her.

Continue reading " Sacramento Nursing Home Neglect Hidden By Falsified Records " »