One of the questions that often arises is what are the formalities when it comes to settling a case that involves a minor client.  If you have a pending settlement with a minor, the court requires that you seek court approval of the settlement.  This process is called a minor's compromise and it is filed with the court when a settlement is reached in the case.  A minors compromise is where the parent or guardian is signing off on the settlement on behalf of the minor, due to the fact that they are under the age of majority.  Due to the inherent pitfalls with negotiating and obtaining court approval of this type of settlement, only a knowledgeable Fresno personal injury attorney should attempt to tackle a minor's compromise. 

The court wants to approve this type of transaction, if the amount is greater than $5,000.00, to protect the interests of the minor and make sure they are not taken advantage of in the process.  The court will also want to see that the funds are going to be placed in a blocked account that the minor will not have access to until they turn 18.  Or, in the alternative, if the settlement is a higher amount, the court may also want the funds to be placed in an annuity or have a structured settlement where the minor will not receive the funds or distributions until they reach the age of majority and then the funds are paid out over time.  When dealing with the intricacies of a minor's compromise, its best to seek the guidance of a Fresno injury lawyer who knows the Fresno County Court System.   

Most people don't realize that as a result of a DUI accident where a victim is injured, the victim may be able to recover what is known as punitive damages.  Punitive damages are unique damages that are based upon the reprehensible nature of the defendant's conduct, his or her disregard for the likelihood of causing injury, the defendant's financial status and the amount that should be paid to discourage future misconduct.   In California, our supreme court has held that these type of damages are recoverable against a DUI driver who causes injury. (Taylor v. Superior Court (1979)  24 Cal.3d 890).  This is why, if you've been injured in an accident caused by someone driving under the influence, it is important that you reach out and call a Fresno Injury Attorney as soon as possible to prosecute your claim and protect your rights.

The statute that sets forth punitive damages as a possible remedy is in California Civil Code section 3294.  It says that if someone acts maliciously, the injured party may recover damages to set an example and punish the wrongdoer.  In the case, for the young man accused of killing two people in Clovis last month, there is the high likelihood, whether or not he is found guilty, that he will be sued civilly.  While the least of his concerns at this point, he could also face the prospect of paying out punitive damages to the families of his alleged victims.  In the event of a collision involving someone driving under the influence, if you or someone you know has been hurt, you should seek the advice of a knowledgeable personal injury lawyer in Fresno. 

In the wake of the pepper spray incident involving occupy Wall Street protestors at U.C. Davis, two U.C. Davis officers remain on leave as an investigation is underway into police use of pepper spray.   Previously, the United States Appeals Court in California, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that police justification for the use of pepper spray required a heightened standard, similar to the use of tazers. 

The requirement is that police must face an imminent danger before they can utilize pepper spray on a suspect.  (Young v. County of Los Angeles,  No. 09-56372 (9th Cir. August 26, 2011; Headwaters Forest Defense v. County of Humboldt, 276 F.3d 1125, 1129-30 (9th Cir. 2002).)  Due to the complexity of law in the area of excessive force and civil rights violations, it is imperative to contact a knowledgeable Fresno Accident Lawyer to assist you.

In this case, the protesters did not appear to pose a threat to the officers.  In addition, warnings to move or to leave the vicinity were already deemed to not be sufficient to employ pepper spray based upon the decision in Headwaters Forest Defense v. County of Humboldt.  Based upon the recent decision in Young v. County of Los Angeles, it appears the officers were clearly not following the law.  Accordingly, it is important contact a Fresno Injury Attorney immediately if you suspect that you have been the victim of excessive force or police brutality.

A hellicopter ride that ended in tragedy last year, has reached a resolution as far as the Civil Suit is concerned.  In January 2010, a helicopter carrying employees of the Fish and Game Department were killed when the helicopter crashed into a power line.  Following the accident, a lawsuit was filed suit against Souther California Edison alleging negligence in failing to properly mark the location of the utility line.  Instead of proceeding to trial, all sides agreed to settle the dispute. 

This case highlights the need to contact an experienced and aggressive Fresno Personal Injury Attorney when there is a wrongful death claim. Part and parcel of the settlement is a provision where by Southern California Edison agrees to improve the visibility of the power line to avoid a future disaster. Plaintiff's claimed the grounding wire was thin and ran next to the powerlines, but would have been difficult for a pilot to see.  While, the terms of the settlement with Souther California Edison remain confidential, a prior settlement this month was reached for $10 million with the company that supplied the helicopter.

One of the most common questions I get asked as a Fresno Injury Attorney, is whether you can get the statement a defendant made to their insurance company prior to the lawsuit being filed. While it seems like it would be a no brainer that you could get access to these statements, the California courts have held otherwise.  Which is unfortunate, since we do everything in our power to get every possible piece of evidence we can for our clients.  

In, SOLTANIRASTEGAR v. SUPERIOR COURT, 208 Cal.App.3d 424 (1989) it was decided that statements made to an insurance company following an accident for the sole purpose of defending against a possible claim are protected by the attorney client privilege.  Even though there is no actual law suit filed yet.  The court decided that if these statements were discoverable, it would require attorneys to be involved at an early stage on every single claim and would place an enormous burden on the insurance companies.  So in the meantime, it remains critical to obtain statements from the defendant through the use of accident reports, witnesses, depositions and, of course, at trial.  Whether its a Fresno Auto Accident Matter or a Premises liability case, or any other type of injury claim, the use of the Defendant's statements has a pivotal role in the area of personal injury law.