For its part, the Santa Clara Water District admits that around 107 gallons have been leaked since 2001 in eight separate incidents. However, it contends that all leaks dissipated into the water system with no ill-effects. It also issued a statement stating that it routinely replaces accessible leaky valves. The Santa Clara Water District acknowledges that it needs to replace aging valves that are placed at the bottom of the reservoirs. The District will need to drain most of the water from the reservoirs in order to safely replace the valves. Therefore, the Santa Clara Water District has been waiting for a scheduled seismic retrofitting of reservoir dams to replace the poorly functioning valves, because it will have to drain the reservoir for the retrofitting anyway. The District is reportedly working the District Attorney's Office to come to some sort of agreement with regards to the leaks.

ABC news reports about another example. In 2011, the San Francisco Water District's hired contractor started to replace current water meters in San Francisco homes with wireless water meters. Unfortunately, the work, which requires the water to be turned on and off, puts pressure on older plumbing systems. Water that gushes back through the pipes can damage pipes that are already in poor condition because of age. Since the work started, 69 cases have been reported of broken pipes after the contractor finished replacing the meter. Since the pipes are located on private property the owner is responsible for the repairs which cost upwards of $2,000. In the case of John Lubimir the cost was $5800 to repair the water pipes on his property. The contractor, Grid One Solutions, insists the most of the broken pipes were old and probably previously damaged. The contractor tells affected residents the breakages are not its fault, that it is upgrading the meters as a service, and that the homeowner is completely responsible for their pipes. Meanwhile, Supervisor Scott Weiner has complained that the installation of the wireless water meters is mandatory, so homeowners really have no choice. The San Francisco Water District reviews each claim individually, and usually turns it over the the contractor in this matter.

One of the biggest environmental disasters in recent years was the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil spill. On April 20, 2010, an explosion rocked at a nine year old offshore drilling unit that was being leased and operated by BP. Within a couple of days, an oil slick appeared near the rig, confirming fears that the explosion had caused a leak. Before the leak was stemmed, approximately 4.9 million barrels of oil leaked into the Gulf of Mexico waters. Industries and individuals in several states suffered significant economic losses as a result of the spill and the clean-up effort. Health concerns remain an issue for Gulf coast residents.

The oil spill resulted in multiple lawsuits, including individual and class claims against BP. The filing deadline for the existing Quick Payment program has recently been extended from May 7 to June 11. Pursuant to the program, individual claimants are eligible for a $5,000 payment and businesses can receive $25,000. By filing a claim and receiving a payment pursuant to the Quick Payment program, claimants waive the right to any future claims stemming from the 2010 disaster with the exception of those related to injury or death.

Authorities overseeing the resolution of claims are in the process of phasing out the existing Gulf Coast Claims Facility (“GCCF”). Instead of the GCCF, claims will be handled by a Court-Supervised Settlement Program. This program is part of a settlement agreement applicable to more than 100,000 claimants and is a portion of the resolution to two class actions against BP. It is designed to determine and remedy both individual and business losses stemming from the Deepwater Horizon accident via a court-supervised process. In setting forth the terms of the process, United States District Judge Carl Barbier has implemented a filing deadline of either April 22, 2014 or six months from the effective date of the settlement.

Pursuant to the court-supervised program, individual claim amounts will be calculated by estimating the difference between projected earnings and actual earnings for the period between May 2010 and either December 2010 or April 2011, depending on the industry involved. Additional awards to individual claimants will account for costs of lost health insurance and pension benefits, as well as the costs involved in job searches or re-training necessitated by the spill. Existing businesses will be compensated based on profit losses that lasted for three or more consecutive months in the eight month period following the spill and also based on comparing profits to growth trends at the industry and economy-wide levels. The court-supervised program also sets forth guidance for compensating failed start-up businesses, successful start-ups that may have been limited by the spill, and losses impacting multi-facility businesses.

As a Northern California toxic tort law firm, we are prepared to help should an environmental disaster akin to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill impact our region. Our San Francisco oil and gas lawyer will continue to follow the lawsuits stemming from the 2010 tragedy so that our team can better serve local individuals and businesses that may be harmed by a spill in the Pacific waters or by another industrial accident that results in similar economic and/or health damages.

See Related Blog Posts:
Proposed Gas Storage Field Raises Safety Concerns
Safety in the Wake of the 2010 San Bruno Pipeline Explosion

There were no less than four major injury accidents in San Francisco during the week of May 7 to May 14. The accidents exemplify common reasons for collisions.

Drunk Driving:

Thankfully, fatal drunk driving accidents are on the decline. According to the Center for Disease Control drunk driving fatalities declined 20% from 2006 to 2009. Even so, drunk driving is still the cause of 1 in 3 fatal crashes in the United States. The Marin Independent Journal reports that during the weekend of May 12 five accidents were attributed to driving under the influence in and around San Francisco. Earlier in the week, a drunk driver on Treasure Island struck a parked car, pushing it into two pedestrians throwing away trash into a nearby garbage receptacle. The 31 year old man suffered a cut to the back of the head and the 11 year old boy was taken to the hospital with a life threatening head injury. The car also caused minor injuries to a 9 year old boy who was getting out of the parked car at the time. As Mothers Against Drunk Driving urges drivers to remember, there are many variables that determine how alcohol impaired a person becomes with each drink, therefore the safest choice is never drink and drive.

Speeding:

According to Millbrae Patch, on May 10 a man driving a van on 101S between San Francisco and Millbrae exited the freeway into a turn. Due to his excessive speed, he lost control and crashed into a retaining wall. Moreover, the man was not wearing a seat belt and was ejected onto the roadway sustaining major injuries. Freeways and thoroughfares often give drivers a false sense of security because they tend to be wide and straight. However, speeding always reduces drivers’ control over their vehicle and may prevent them from responding in time to an unexpected danger. The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration estimates that in 2007, speeding was involved in 31% of fatal crashes in the United States.

Turns and Intersections:

CBS Local News reported that on May 9 a PG&E truck turned left into from Van Ness onto 13th Street in San Francisco and collided with a bicyclist. The bicyclist was rushed to the hospital with life threatening injuries. On May 14, an SUV driver hit a 62 year old man at a crosswalk in North Beach and then sped off, leaving the man lying in the street. The hit and run victim was taken to the hospital with a life threatening head injury. The police are asking for help identifying the driver of the SUV. It goes without saying, that leaving the scene of an accident is one of the worst decisions a driver can make. Turns and intersections present a lot of challenges for drivers, especially in high tourist areas like North Beach. Drivers are not only looking out for other cars, but also pedestrians, bicyclists, and buses that may cross their path. Accidents at crosswalks should remind drivers to check all mirrors before turning, pedestrians to look both ways before crossing, and bicyclists to always dismount and walk through crosswalks, rather than unexpectedly veering through an intersection.

Police have not yet released a statement concerning the cause of this collision and we do not wish to speculate about the factors that contributed to this specific crash. As your Sacramento car accident law firm, The Brod Law Firm team is constantly reminded that a wide range of factors can contribute to a traffic crash. We hope that reading our blog helps remind community members of some of these factors and thus helps prevent future Sacramento automobile crashes.

One factor that is often overlooked is driver fatigue. In 2005, the AAA Foundation for Traffic studied the problem of driver fatigue. Referencing statistics compiled by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”), the article suggested that a conservative estimate would by that 100,000 people are involved in police-reported collisions that directly stemmed from driver fatigue. These crashes included an estimated 1,500 fatalities, 71,000 injuries, and $12.5 billion in financial losses. Many experts feel these numbers underestimate the impact of drowsy driving, noting the difficulty of determining when fatigue is the root cause of a collision.

Driving while sleep-deprived is very dangerous. If the driver succumbs to sleep, any number of accidents might follow such as drifting out of the lane and causing a head-on collision or crashing into a tree. Even if they remain awake, a drowsy driver has significantly reduced skills. Studies have shown that being awake for 24 hours straight renders a drowsy driver just as risky as a driver with a blood alcohol concentration (“BAC”) of 0.10%, well above the legal limit in all states with California considering driver impaired at a BAC of 0.08%. Drowsiness reduces the cognitive-psychomotor abilities of a driver. Signs that a driver is too sleepy to drive include: The inability to remember the last few miles of the trip; Wandering and disconnected thought patterns; Trouble keeping one’s eyes open and focusing visually; Drifting out of the assigned lane; Missing traffic signals or signs; Frequent yawning; Nodding of the head because the head feels heavy. A AAA study of police officers who respond to traffic incidents found that nearly 90% had at least once pulled over a driver for a suspected DUI and found the driver was sleepy and not intoxicated.

Drowsy driving can and should be avoided. If you have been harmed in collision due to another driver being drowsy or otherwise negligent, please contact The Brod Firm. Greg Brod is a skilled and experienced Sacramento personal injury lawyer and our firm offers all prospective clients a free consultation to discuss their unique circumstance and how the law might apply to their case.

See Related Blog Posts:
Drivers with ADHD at Higher Risk of Accidents
Healthy Driving is Safe Driving

One health issue that is of growing concern in our country and our state is diabetes. Few stop to consider the issue but the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has issued statements noting that, in some cases, diabetes can impair a patient’s ability to drive and can lead to accidents on the road. Blood sugar levels that are either too high or too low can leave a patient feeling dizzy, sleepy, or confused and can also cause blurred vision. In more extreme cases, dangerous blood sugar levels can lead to loss of consciousness. If diabetes is not well-controlled, long-term effects can include nerve damage and visual impairment

Most individuals with diabetes can drive safely, but diabetics should be vigilant about monitoring there health status. It is vital that patients discuss safe driving with their health care providers. Monitoring blood glucose levels is important for the health of a diabetic patient and is even more crucial when the patient is behind the wheel. For some patients, keeping healthy snacks in the glove compartment can be a useful in case glucose levels drop suddenly. Low blood glucose levels can inhibit a driver’s ability to focus on the multiple tasks involved in driving safely. All drivers should have regular vision checks but this is particularly important for diabetics given the impact the condition can have on visual strength.

Diabetes is of particular concern given the recent rise in patients being diagnosed with the condition, but it is certainly not the only health issue that can impact driving ability. Sleep disorders, epilepsy, and fainting spells are just a few of the health issues that, when not well-controlled, can make driving unsafe. Patients dealing with any disease or chronic health condition should talk with their doctor about whether their health might impair their ability to drive safely. Options do exist, including public transportation and community center services, that can help an individual maintain mobility when driving is deemed unsafe.

Responsible driving means ensuring that the driver is both mentally and physically fit for being behind the wheel. Even a short trip can be dangerous when health impairs the ability of a driver to handle the complex task. Drivers must be honest in assessing their own ability to drive and family and friends should have an honest conversation if they believe health renders it unsafe for a loved one to drive.

We believe in preventing car accidents but we also know that they are a reality. If you have been injured in a car accident in San Francisco or elsewhere in Northern California, please contact our firm. Our experienced San Francisco injury lawyer can help you sort out the details of your unique case and determine if you may be entitled to damages and compensation for an accident that was not your fault.

See Related Blog Posts:
Injury Attorney Comments on The Dangers of Meth Use
The Danger of Mixing Drugs and Driving

Commissioner Florio of the California Public Utilities Commission (“PUC”) is working to block a local utility company from storing natural gas in a sandstone formation 3,800 feet below Avondale Glen Elder, a neighborhood in Sacramento. Florio is opposing the request by Sacramento National Gas Storage LLC to undertake the $70 million project and store 7.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas. The site is the former Florin Gas Field, a depleted natural gas reservoir, located underneath a 379 acre parcel of land containing more than 700 homes. If the PUC approves the request, the company would then need to seek a permit from the city for the project. Ultimately, the company would seek contracts with utility companies looking to store gas at the location. Company officials say they already have a commitment from the Sacramento Municipal Utility District that would use at least half of the field’s capacity.

In his statement opposing the project, Florio cited three significant impacts that, per the environmental impact report, could not meet the requirement of being mitigated to less than significant levels. The three areas are: 1) Potential hazard of a gas leak following gas field re-pressurization for storage; 2) Potential impact on the quality of groundwater due to operations and maintenance of the gas field; and 3) Temporary elevation of noise levels due to construction at the wellhead site. Florio notes that some of the potential for leaks is low but that the impact could be catastrophic and long-lasting.

Approximately three-quarters of the impacted property owners have signed agreements permitting the company to store gas beneath their properties in exchange for initial $500 bonuses and future annual lease payments. While some community organizers applauded Florio’s opposition statement, company representatives note that two other proposed rulings from the PUC have advocated in favor of approval, suggesting the project is safe and necessary for the region. One filing from PUC Administrative Law Judge Richard Smith concluded that the benefits of the project, including economic and social results, justify approving the proposal despite unavoidable environmental impacts. PUC Commissioner Timothy Alan Simon also wrote in support of the project but did call for additional conditions including requiring the company to purchase a general liability policy that would cost $4 million and provide a minimum of $100 million in coverage. Simon also called for the company to purchase a surety bond that would cover potential costs such as remedying negative impacts of groundwater.

Gregory Brod is an experienced Sacramento utility accident attorney. The team at The Brod Law Firm urges the PUC and officials in Sacramento to make safety a priority as they consider the natural gas storage proposal. We are prepared to represent victims of natural gas and oil industry accidents but know that prevention is always the best option.

See Related Blog Posts:
Safety in the Wake of the 2010 San Bruno Pipeline Explosion
California Residents Must Protect Legal Rights Following Refinery Injuries

Sacramento bicycle riders are participating in an annual effort to make our region bicycle-friendly. Due to an increase in participation, the annual Million Mile May event has grown to become Two Million Mile May. Cyclists are registering at the event website and pledging the number of miles they expect to ride in May. As of this weekend, 5,200 Sacramento cyclists have pledged over a million miles. In 2011, participants logged 1.4 million miles in an effort to help remind drivers of the need to share the road and to advocate for steps to make our region safe and accessible for riders.

At the state level, the California Legislature is considering a law that would require drivers to leave a three foot safety cushion when passing a bicycle. The bill failed to pass last year but there is a notable difference in the details of this year’s version of the proposal. Last year, the bill would have required drivers to slow to a speed of 15 miles per hour when there wasn’t room to allow the three foot space. This provision raised safety concerns and the current bill instead requires the driver slow to a reasonable speed for the circumstances.

Other efforts are occurring at a local level to make bicycling both safe and convenient. Davis, a city known for its being popular with cyclists, has recently converted four automobile parking spaces into bicycle parking. Each space can accommodate eight bikes and the change helps avoid having bicycles clutter the sidewalks making it easier for pedestrians to enjoy the downtown area, allows restaurants to add sidewalk dining, and helps increase visibility of businesses to those driving through the area. The town’s mayor says he has received calls requesting the effort be expanded to convert additional spaces to bike parking.

Traffic engineers are also working to improve safety in an area that has been the site of multiple Sacramento bicycle accidents in recent years, including two fatalities. On May 17, the Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates group will present proposed redesigns for the H and J Street intersections with Carlson Drive that lie between Sacramento State and River Park. The meeting will be held at the area Presbyterian church. A consultant has also been hired by the city to look at improving safety at the intersections.

This summer will also see the start of a bikeway project in downtown Sacramento. The city will be adding bike lanes to parts of J, I, G and H streets as well as Fifth, Ninth, Tenth, and Capitol Mall. Portions of the roadways will remain at three car lanes while other sections will lose a car lane to accommodate the new bike lanes.

We applaud the efforts to make our region safe and welcoming for cyclists. Greg Brod is proud to serve as a lawyer for bicycle accidents in Sacramento and throughout Northern California. A consultation is always free and most injury cases are handled on a contingency basis so there is no charge unless you obtain compensation for your injury.

See Related Blog Posts:
Do Bike Helmets Prevent Concussions?
Oakland Bicycle Fatality Reminds Residents of the Need to Share the Road

According to the Los Altos Town Crier, on November 22, 2010 Katharine Edgecombe was driving a Land Cruiser that rear ended another car at a crosswalk. That car, driven by Conny Marx, allegedly slammed forward into two women crossing the street. The two women are filed a complaint on November 1, 2011 against the City of Los Altos, Katharine Edgecombe, and Conny Marx to recover for damages resulting from the accident. Five months later the City of Los Altos sought to include property owner Mark Choo in the case by naming him in its cross-complaint. The city alleges that a tree near his duplex impeded visibility at the crosswalk and that Mr. Choo is liable for damages.

It is generally the plaintiff’s role to name defendants in a suit for damages. However, according to California Civil Procedure Section 428.70, a defendant may bring a cross-complaint against a previously unnamed party, known as a third party defendant, if the original defendant could recover all or part of the judgment he owes from that third party defendant. This convoluted definition becomes clearer when using the example of the above case. The City of Los Altos may be found liable for the dangerous condition of public property, which might include the view obscuring tree. In turn, the City of Los Altos has filed a cross-complaint against Mark Choo saying that he is fully or partially responsible for any damages that can be attributed to the overhanging tree. The suit will not determine whether Mark Choo is liable for any wrong-doing, but whether, as the homeowner closest to the tree, he is responsible for any damages it causes.

Each city has its own distinct municipal code, and many across the Bay Area make residents responsible for trees on sidewalks adjacent to their property. Los Altos Municipal Code 9.20.025 indeed makes residents responsible for the maintenance of trees, shrubs, and other growths adjacent to their property and specifically puts the liability on them for property damage or other claims arising from such plants. The code also requires that all trimming and perform in accordance with certain standards found in the municipal code and the American National Standards Institute.

One more complicating factor: Mark Choo claims that because the tree interferes with the power lines, PG&E instructed him not to trim the tree. According to him, PG&E comes out to trim the tree every 18 months. However, on its website PG&E provides a number to call if a resident thinks a tree near high voltage power lines poses a danger.

Whether the tree was a substantial contributor to the accident or not, the City of Los Altos is using the statutes and codes in place to shift its monetary liability from the city as a whole to an individual resident, illustrating the importance of investigating thoroughly in every case the possibility of non-apparent defendants.

This blog entry will concentrate on the role of the lead plaintiff in class actions. Also known as the representative plaintiff or named party, the lead plaintiff’s lends his or her name to the caption of the case (i.e. Smith et. al. vs. Defendant Company). The lead plaintiff is a representative member of the class who stands in for the group and acts on behalf of the full class. In some cases, more than one class member can share the role.

Given the importance of choosing an appropriate lead plaintiff, court rules require that the court approve the selection. Often the person who gets the litigation moving will later be deemed the lead plaintiff. In order to qualify for the role, the court must find that the lead plaintiff’s claims be typical of the claims in the class and that the lead plaintiff be capable of adequately representing the interests of the group as a whole. Certain types of cases have more specific requirements, such as a preference in certain securities cases to have the person with the largest financial interest take the lead role. Many courts impose a time limit on applications for the lead plaintiff role.

The lead plaintiff role comes with a number of responsibilities and, in general, involves exercising control over the claim and deciding what direction the case will take. It is the responsibility of the lead plaintiff to select counsel for the class and then to work closely with the chosen law firm. One of the first decisions that the lead plaintiff must take, in conjunction with counsel, is to determine the requirements for membership in the class. The lead plaintiff will then work with the attorney in the discovery process to identify facts that will support the claims alleged by the class. This can include having the lead plaintiff review documents and join counsel during information-gathering depositions. Defense counsel may also wish to take the deposition of the lead plaintiff during the discovery phase. In most class actions, it is not feasible for the entire class to be present for courtroom matters and the named party will usually attend hearings, and the trial if one becomes necessary, on behalf of the full class.

As with all civil litigation, a large percentage of class actions end in settlement rather than proceeding to a full trial. The lead plaintiff works with the class counsel to review any potential settlements. In reviewing a proposed settlement, the lead plaintiff must act on behalf of the full group and determine whether the proposal is fair and just for the class, not just whether it is in the lead plaintiff’s own interest. Other class members do have the ability to “opt out” if they disagree with a settlement but the lead plaintiff’s role in settlement is perhaps the heaviest responsibility that the role carries.

If a class action is successful with either a productive settlement or a verdict at trial, the named plaintiff may be receive an additional award beyond his or her share as a class member. This is also known as an incentive payment. The amount is based on several factors including the role the lead plaintiff took in the litigation (active versus more hands-off) and any financial risk incurred such as having paid for costs associated with the case, including monies spent providing notice of the action to potential class members or the cost of engaging in discovery.

If you believe that you may have a claim suitable for class action treatment, it is vital that you find a qualified law firm. We have the experience necessary to helping you file a successful class action in San Francisco or other Northern California location. Let The Brod Law Firm be your partner. Call our office for a free consultation to discuss your case and whether a California class action (state or federal) may be appropriate for your case.

See Related Blog Posts:
Barriers in Class Action Lawsuits
An Introduction To Class Actions

Methamphetamine is a synthetically manufactured drug that impacts a user’s central nervous system. Meth does have some limited medical uses, but most meth is manufactured for and consumed by recreational drug users. The drug can be consumed in many ways including orally, intravenously (i.e. by injection), by smoking, and by snorting. Even in small doses, meth acts as a stimulant and can lead to rapid or irregular heartbeat, increased blood pressure, and increased respiration rates. High doses of the drug can cause stroke, heart attack, convulsions, and even death. Meth also causes psychological changes which can include anxiety, euphoria, aggression, hallucination, delusions of power, a feeling of invincibility, paranoia, and obsessive behaviors. Long-term users may experience dangerous weight loss, heart disease, dental decay, memory loss, reduced mental functioning, violent tendencies, and symptoms akin to schizophrenia. Depression and suicide are also common among users. Withdrawal can be very difficult and can also cause significant physical and mental suffering.

The production of meth is dangerous in itself. “Shake and bake” style meth labs use a very volatile process that can result in an explosion if even a minor error in measurement or handling occurs. Meth labs have become a significant cause of fires that can destroy property and cause severe burns impacting not only those involved in the manufacture but also innocent victims who happened to be in close proximity to a meth lab, such as inhabitants of a neighboring apartment. Mobile meth labs can lead to vehicle explosions and traffic accidents.

Like with many other drugs, meth can also impair a user’s ability to drive and can led to dangerous traffic accidents. Reports indicate that meth use among truckers has been an issue since the 1970s, with drivers using the drug to try and log longer hours behind the wheel. Both active meth use and the process of coming down after use can cause accidents by hampering vision, impairing decision-making, and reducing motor skills.

Drug use remains a serious concern for our society. Users can destroy their health and mental functioning. Meth use and production can also harm innocent bystanders. If you or someone you love has suffered physical harm or economic loss due to someone else’s use or manufacture of methamphetamine, please contact our San Francisco victim’s attorney. Gregory Brod is a leading San Francisco injury lawyer and our firm offers a free consultation to all potential clients.

See Related Blog Posts:
The Danger of Mixing Drugs and Driving
The Complicated and Dangerous Side Effects of Prescription Drugs

Fatal crashes are a common safety indicator since the severity of the injuries is clear- they led to death. More generally, the NHTSA states that helmets are 85-88 percent effective in mitigating head injuries. Road bicycling helmets are made of stiff foam covered by a thin and durable shell, often with vents for temperature control. The foam absorbs the impact of the crash, while the shell keeps out foreign objects. Cyclists should keep in mind a properly worn helmet is an essential tool to lessen the effects of head trauma during a crash. Unfortunately, the brain is one of the most vulnerable organs in our body and a helmet can only provide so much padding. The force of impact can smack the brain against the skull, causing a concussion (also known as Velo News, disoriented at the end of the race, Horner asked if it had been long since he crashed. Following the incident, USA Cycling has partnered with the Medicine of Cycling group to implement cognitive tests for professional riders involved in a crash.

The bicycling community in general may want to take heed of these guidelines as well. In the event of a crash, a bicyclist may initially think his injuries are not severe. However, he may want to be evaluated for non-obvious injuries, such as whiplash or concussion. A person suffering a concussion often feels mentally disoriented and physically off-balance and experiences sensitivity to light and headaches. A concussion takes time to heal, and unfortunately, will likely require the bicyclist stay off the bike for a while since concussions make evaluating and reacting to common commuter risks more difficult. Moreover, the bicyclist is more susceptible to a second, more severe concussion, than he was for the first. If you recognize any of the indicators of a concussion after a crash, you should seek medical attention to determine the exact cause and extent of your injuries.

Police in Woodland are continuing to investigate a suspected case of elder abuse. On Friday April 27, officers arrived at the 200 block of Ablele Street in response to a domestic disturbance report. When they arrived at the scene, they found an elderly man, identified in some reports as Jerry Woodall standing in the front yard of a home. The man was suffering from multiple, non-life-threatening injuries and additional responders were called in to transport him to Woodland Memorial Hospital for treatment.

Officers quickly focused suspicions on the elderly man’s son, 42 year old James Woodall. By the time police arrived, the suspect had returned inside a residence and he refused to open the door when the officers knocked. Police contacted the younger Woodall by telephone but he refused to emerge. Eventually, a team of officers, aided by a police dog, forcibly entered the home. They found that Woodall had barricaded himself in a bedroom and that he had started a fire. Officers retreated out of concern for their own safety. A negotiation team was called in and the suspect eventually began communicating and exited the back bedroom. Police were then able to subdue the man and they apprehended him with the aid of the police canine. The younger Woodland was treated for minor injuries sustained during the apprehension. He was then booked at the Yolo County Jail. He has been charged with suspicion of battery causing significant injury and elder abuse. Additional charges of arson and battery on a police dog have also been filed as a result of the stand-off.

The National Center on Elder Abuse (“NCEA”) is a resource center that seeks to prevent elder abuse nationwide. A 2005 NCEA report estimates that between one and two million Americans over age 65 have been exploited, injured, or otherwise mistreated by someone they depended upon for care and protection. Elder abuse statistics are very hard to compile because there is little agreement on a precise definition and because a large percentage of elder abuse cases go unreported. The same NCEA report suggested that only one in every fourteen cases of elder abuse in a domestic setting is brought to the attention of authorities. In additional to physical injury, elder abuse can also include financial exploitation, a form of mistreatment that may impact five million elderly Americans each year with estimates suggesting a mere one in twenty-five cases being reported.

Everyone can play a role in preventing elder abuse by keeping vigilant for potential abuse and staying connected to seniors who might be isolated from society, especially if they are suffering from dementia or other illness. Abuse can happen in nursing homes, hospitals, and even at home. If you suspect someone you know is the victim of elder abuse in Northern California, it is important that you speak up. Information about reporting California elder abuse can be found at the following website: http://www.cdss.ca.gov/agedblinddisabled/PG1298.htm. Our experienced Sacramento elder abuse attorney can provide additional guidance to help investigate and stop abuse in Northern California. We can also assist the abuse victim in recovering compensation for both physical and financial harm. Working together as a community, we can bring attention to elder abuse and help prevent this egregious wrong.

See Related Blog Posts:
Sacramento Elder Abuse Lawyer Comments on Fall Prevention in Nursing Homes
Oakland-San Francisco Elder Abuse Attorney Comments on the Reporting and Prevention of Elder Abuse

This week, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that District Attorney George Gascón is moving forward with felony vehicular manslaughter charges stemming from an incident that occurred on March 29, 2012. Chris Bucchere, age thirty-five, was riding his bicycle in the Castro district when he struck and killed seventy-one year old Sutchi Hui. At the time of the accident, Hui was a pedestrian and in the crosswalk located at the intersection of Market and Castro Streets. The charge is a felony and could carry a sentence of sixteen months incarceration.

While it is believed that Bucchere had a yellow light when he cycles southbound through the intersection, a witness reports seeing him go through several stop signs and red lights on Divisadero Street before he reached the accident scene. A tracking device on the bicycle also indicated Bucchere was travelling faster than 35 miles per hour in a 25 mile per hour zone. The district attorney’s office believes these and other facts support a charge that Bucchere was grossly negligent and failed to yield to Hui at the crosswalk. Surveillance footage also shows that the cyclist was hunched over and made little or no effort to avoid hitting the pedestrian.

Initial reports focused on internet postings allegedly made by Bucchere. The posts suggested the cyclist was “too committed to stop” and opted to continue speeding and plow through the crosswalk at the area with the fewest pedestrians. The D.A. indicated the posts are unlikely to be used in court because authorship cannot be proven.

The charges are notably different from those in another San Francisco bicycle accident that happened last summer. In that case, twenty-three year old Randolph Ang struck sixty-eight year old pedestrian Dionette Cherney who dies after falling and hitting her head. The accident occurred on July 15 as the tourist from Washington D.C. crossed Mission Street at the Embarcadero. Cherney’s family supported the D.A.’s decision to only file a misdemeanor charge that resulted in a plea deal involving three years’ probation, 500 hours of community service, and $15,375 in restitution for the deceased’s family. Ang’s attorney noted that, in contrast to the more recent incident, his client immediately stopped to try to help the victim, expressed remorse, and took responsibility for the accident.

As a reminder, a victim can file a civil suit regardless of the nature of criminal charges and even if authorities opt not to file a criminal suit. In vehicle accident cases, the criminal system is focused on punishing a violation of the law. In contrast, the civil system seeks to provide compensation to those harmed by the wrongdoer’s acts. The Brod Law Firm focuses on civil claims. If you have suffered injury in an accident that was someone else’s fault, please contact us for a free consultation to discuss how our San Francisco victim’s law firm can help you recover compensation for your injuries.

See Related Blog Posts:
Oakland Bicycle Fatality Reminds Residents of the Need to Share the Road
San Francisco Bicycle Accident Attorney on Safety and The Policy of Contributory Negligence

Lately, the statistic that has been trotted out again and again that using a cell phone while driving is as dangerous as driving while drunk. For instance, the website Distraction.gov by the U.S. Department of Transportation cites a University of Utah study and states, “Using a cell phone while driving - whether it's hand-held or hands-free delays a driver's reactions as much as having a blood alcohol concentration at the legal limit of .08 percent.” From government departments to the Discovery Channel’s the Mythbusters, many are making the comparison.

Drunk driving is firmly embedded in American drivers’ minds as unacceptable behavior, although 1.44 million DUI and DWI arrests were made nationally in 2009. Likewise, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration recently conducted some driver surveys which show a contradiction between belief and behavior regarding cell phone use and driving. According to their research, 90% of respondents said it makes them feel they are in peril as a passenger when the driver is using a cell phone. Yet, most admit to receiving calls while driving. The NHTSA survey also reports that drivers 25 years and younger are two to three times more likely to text and drive than older drivers.

Until the the education effort to make cell phone use and driving as unacceptable as drunk driving, the numbers of drivers who text or talk by phone will increase as more Americans who grew up with smart phones start driving. A 2009 study by the Allstate Foundation reported that 49% of teens admitted to cell phone use while driving (the number was 57% in a State Farm study), while 23% admitted to drinking and driving. It may be inferred that the education effort still has a long way to go.

LaHood also used the comparison, saying the drunk drivers used to get cabs from police officers but now they get jail time. He believes that enforcement should also be much stricter when it comes to cell phone use, according to the Chicago Tribune. The many comparisons beg the question, how far will the responsibility for texting and driving and other cell phone use go? In California, under Section 53150 of the Government Code, a drunk driver may be liable for the costs associated with sending emergency responders to the site of an incident caused by his actions. Furthermore, debtors in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court may not discharge personal injury judgments that were a result of drunk driving (11 USC Section 523(9)). Interested parties may want to watch for future developments in this area of the law to see how close the comparison between driving under the influence and cell phone use while driving converges, not only on statistics but enforcement and punishment as well.

The Federal Railway Administration reports that over 11,000 railroad/train incidents occurred in 2011. This figure includes train and highway rail accidents, issues stemming from trespassing, and other events that caused death, injury, or illness involving railroads. These incidents caused 712 fatalities and 8,033 additional injuries.

Train safety is important for both pedestrians and drivers. Today’s trains are often quieter than in the past so vigilance is particularly key. The average train weighs about 200 tons and trains can weigh as much as 6,000 tons. Trains take time to come to a complete stop and cannot veer around objects in their path. It is thus vital for all of us to exercise extreme caution around trains and railway tracks.

Pedestrians should only cross railroad tracks at specified crossing sites and should obey all signs and signals. Walking on railroad tracks in dangerous and usually also constitutes illegal trespassing. Individuals waiting for a train at a station should always remain behind marked safety lines until the train has come to a complete stop. You should not assume that trains will only arrive on schedule and should be alert for a train anytime you are walking or standing near train tracks. It is never safe to walk on railroad bridges since they usually do not have room for both a pedestrian and a train.

Drivers should exercise similar caution and should always look before driving across tracks and should obey all railway signs and signals. Drivers should not attempt to drive around gate arms and should never attempt to beat a train that appears to be moving slowly. Multiple trains can be travelling in relatively quick succession so you cannot assume it is safe to proceed across tracks the moment a train has passed. If your car stalls and will not restart while crossing railroad tracks, the driver and all passengers should get out of the vehicle and remain away from the tracks while awaiting assistance.

Our San Francisco injury attorney understands the complexity of Northern California train collisions. Each case requires a detailed and specific legal analysis. Please call our team to arrange a free consultation to discuss your unique case and how we can help you obtain compensation for your injuries.

See Related Blog Posts:
Amtrak Train Collides with Big Rig
Fatal Sacramento Train Crash Highlights Importance of Transit Safety