Unexpected events can interrupt even the most carefully prepared trial. But when a lead attorney suddenly becomes ill, does the court have to pause the case? That issue was at the center of Alsaedi v. Westbrook (2026), an unpublished California Court of Appeal decision involving a mid-trial request for a continuance after the defendant’s lead …
Continue reading "Can a Personal Injury Trial Continue If Lead Counsel Becomes Sick?"
Not every tragedy involving law enforcement gives rise to a lawsuit. Even when officers voluntarily assist someone in crisis, determining whether they can later be held legally responsible for that person’s injuries or death is often far more complex than it appears. Those issues were at the center of Moller v. County of San Bernardino …
Continue reading "When Can Law Enforcement Be Liable After Voluntarily Assisting Someone?"
Insurance companies often defend claim denials by arguing there was a legitimate and reasonable dispute over whether a policy covered the loss or whether benefits were owed. In California, that principle is commonly known as the Genuine Dispute Doctrine. In other words, an insurance company generally cannot be held liable for bad faith if it …
Continue reading "What the Nargizyan Decision Means for California Insurance Bad Faith Claims"
Expert witnesses are often hired to evaluate evidence, offer opinions, and help resolve legal disputes. But what happens if an expert’s recommendations later prove to be ineffective? A recent California Court of Appeal decision addresses that question and clarifies when California’s litigation privilege may protect expert witnesses from lawsuits arising out of work they performed …
Continue reading "Can an Expert Witness Be Sued for Their Recommendations?"
A recent California Court of Appeal decision examines an important evidentiary issue in personal injury litigation: when evidence of a plaintiff’s intoxication may be presented to a jury. Although the case arose from a wrongful death action involving a pedestrian struck by a public transit bus, the court’s analysis addresses a broader principle—the relationship between …
Continue reading "When Is Evidence of Intoxication Admissible in a Personal Injury Trial?"
A California appellate court recently addressed an issue that can have serious consequences in cases involving public entities: what happens when a lawsuit is filed before the Government Claims Act process has been completed? While the case arose from a sidewalk fall claim against a city, the court’s analysis focuses on a broader issue: whether …
Continue reading "Government Claims Act Deadlines: Why Premature Filing Can Bar a Claim"
For years, state agencies have overstepped their bounds, operating under the assumption that they can strip alternative-transit riders of their driving privileges without statutory backing. The Court of Appeal’s recent landmark ruling shatters this regulatory overreach—giving personal injury lawyers a clear statutory blueprint to defeat improper “motor vehicle” exclusions in micro-mobility coverage disputes. The Case …
Continue reading "E-Bike Reversal: DMV Cannot Suspend Driver’s License For CUI"
For personal injury litigators, establishing a transportation network company’s (TNC) liability for an injured passenger requires proving both a breach of the standard of care and a direct, foreseeable causal link to the harm. While the plaintiff’s bar continues to push for an expansion of rideshare liability—often arguing that tech platforms owe a heightened duty …
Continue reading "Rideshare Liability and Proximate Cause: The Limits of Duty in TNC Litigation"
In personal injury practice, we often view DUI cases through the lens of a standard motor vehicle accident. However, the recent Ninth Circuit decision in Porio v. Barbari (2026) serves as a critical reminder that a DUI arrest is often the beginning of a complex liability chain—one that can involve civil rights violations, medical negligence, …
Continue reading "Complex DUI Litigation: Navigating the Intersection of Civil Rights and PI"
| Legal News, Premises Liability
In premises liability law, the existence of a dangerous condition does not automatically establish a duty to warn. A recent California Court of Appeal decision underscores how the open and obvious doctrine operates as a limitation on that duty. Cohen v. Chandra Hospitality (2026). For attorneys handling premises liability claims, the decision provides useful guidance …
Continue reading "Open and Obvious Doctrine in Premises Liability Cases"
I recommend this law firm to anyone that needs legal advice. They were professional, courteous, and knowledgeable when I contacted them to handle my car accident. I wish I had used them for my previous case, but at least I now know who to contact to handle future cases.
Aldo A. Los Angeles, CA
