We are providing FREE case review via phone for your safety and convenience during Covid-19 emergency. Learn More

Articles Tagged with injury law firm in San Francisco

102abqkkhby-rezaul-karim-200x300A 93-year-old man passed away after being hit by a cable car in March. He was walking in the crosswalk on Mason Street near the intersection of Filbert Street around 3:10 p.m., according to the San Francisco Police Department. While in the crosswalk, the southbound Powell-Mason cable car struck him, knocking him to the ground, resulting in serious injuries that led to his death.

If you have been hurt or lost a loved one in an accident with a cable car, call a San Francisco personal injury lawyer from Brod Law Firm right away at (800) 427-7020. We offer free consultations to learn about your situation and inform you of your rights and legal options.

San Francisco Cable Cars Known to be Dangerous

Picture an escalator.  Some people stand still, others power-walk.  Parents hold children’s hands.  Some people barely break stride as they board, others hesitate and wait for just the right moment.  Typically, the biggest concern is an out-of-service flight that turns would-be-riders into climbers.  However, as we were reminded this week, escalator accidents are a very real danger and can have life-altering or even life-ending consequences.  When people are injured or killed due to an escalator accident in Northern California, our San Francisco injury lawyer is prepared to fight for their legal rights and the compensation they deserve.

Escalator Abruptly Stops Causing Stumble and Minor Injuries

At the time of this writing, few details had emerged about a Sunday afternoon escalator accident at the Powell BART station.  ABC7 reports that a man fell backwards into four women when an escalator stopped abruptly between the platform and the concourse.  Four people received treatment for minor injuries.

Certain areas of injury law are governed by their own systems and rules.  Workplace injury suits involve a unique scheme set apart from the typical civil compensation system.  It is important to understand the limits of worker’s compensation, when it applies and when it does not and the injured can and should bring a traditional civil claim.  San Francisco injury lawyer Greg Brod has been following a developing case that, much like the case we recently discussed that tested the boundaries of medical malpractice law, helps clarify the rules for California’s injured.

Overview & Facts in Wright vs. California

In late April, as reported in the San Francisco Chronicle, the Supreme Court of California declined to review a decision issued by the Court of Appeals, allowing the ruling that paved the way for a prison guard’s civil injury suit to stand.  According to the appellate court, a year after beginning work at San Quentin State Prison (“San Quentin”), Monnie Wright voluntarily moved into a State-owned rental unit owned within the prison’s gated grounds.  He was not required to move and he paid market rent.  The lease did require Wright to obtain rental insurance.

Medical facilities are growing.  Hospitals stretch across multiple blocks and often seem like a small city.  Visitors often need to stop at an information desk or consult a map to find their destinationhospital.  In addition to medical personnel, large medical centers may employ dozens of workers in non-medical roles.  Injuries can and do occur on hospital grounds, including many that don’t stem directly from medical care.  In this post, our San Francisco injury attorney looks at a recent appellate ruling that clarifies the law on hospital slip-and-fall accidents and other instances in which standard negligence (as opposed to medical negligence) leads to an injury on hospital grounds.

The Facts and the Lower Court’s Dismissal

In June 2010, heart health concerns led to Asma Pouzbaris being admitted to West Anaheim Medical Center.  When she left her bed to use the bathroom, Pouzbaris slipped and fell.  According to the Complaint filed in the Superior Court of Orange County, the floor had recently been mopped but no warnings had been posted.  Responding to the defendant’s request for summary judgment, the court ruled the claim was barred by the statute of limitations.  Recently, the appeals court reviewed the trial court’s decision and, in a ruling available via the California Judicial Branch’s website, reversed and found the suit was filed in a timely manner.

Contact Information