News

Victims of Las Vegas Shooting File Lawsuits in California

The largest mass shooting in U.S. history took place on October 1, when a gunman opened fire on a crowd

The largest mass shooting in U.S. history took place on October 1, when a gunman opened fire on a crowd attending the Route 91 Harvest Festival in Las Vegas. The alleged shooter, Stephen Paddock, killed 58 people, injured another 500, and impacted countless other witnesses in attendance and families of victims. Hundreds of individuals, including victims and family members, are seeking legal recourse through a series of lawsuits in California.

Though the shooting took place in Nevada, the lawsuits were filed in Los Angeles Superior Court. The lawsuits were filed in Southern California because most of the victims were treated here and it is the corporate home of the defendant Live Nation.

Mandalay Bay Hotel and festival organizers face Las Vegas shooting lawsuit

Last month, more than 450 victims and family members filed five lawsuits against Mandalay Bay Resort – owned by MGM Resorts International – and Live Nation – promoter of the Rt. 91 Harvest Festival. The lawsuits allege that the businesses did not do enough to prevent or minimize the attack.

According to the plaintiffs, Mandalay Bay, the hotel where Paddock was staying and from where he allegedly engaged in the shooting, unreasonably failed to prevent Paddock from stockpiling weapons in his room. It is also accused of breaching a duty by not calling the police for several minutes after Paddock reportedly shot one of its security guards. Live Nation is accused of not having adequate exits at the music festival and improperly trained employees.

Live Nation has not commented on the lawsuits. MGM Resorts, however, released a statement saying, “The incident that took place on October 1st was a terrible tragedy perpetrated by an evil man. These kinds of lawsuits are not unexpected and we intend to defend ourselves against them. That said, out of respect for the victims, we will give our response through the appropriate legal channels.”

Las Vegas shooting victims face financial challenges

Many victims of the Las Vegas tragedy are in the midst of economic strain as a result of the shooting. Several funds have been set up for their benefit but the number of victims means many will receive any help toward medical bills and other expenses.

The largest concerted effort to help the victims, the Las Vegas Victims’ Fund, has received a combined $16 million across several platforms including gofundme and a bank-hosted collection. However, with hundreds of victims, organizers announced the need to prioritize claims in such a way that some of those who were shot will not be able to collect from the fund.

It has been estimated that to match the payout to Orlando’s Pulse nightclub shooting victims, the Las Vegas Victim’s Fund would need at least $560 million. The efforts of the contributors are laudable but a favorable outcome in the recently-filed lawsuits could help those uncompensated victims pay outstanding medical bills and catch up financially.

The Salamati Law Firm fights aggressively to ensure injury victims see justice served. To speak with one of our Los Angeles wrongful death attorneys, call 1-888-259-4060.

Additional Information about Las Vegas Shooting Lawsuits:

1. Las Vegas Review-Journal, Las Vegas Victims’ Fund to stop collecting donations Jan. 31, https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/shootings/las-vegas-victims-fund-to-stop-collecting-donations-jan-31/
2. ABC7, Stanton sisters who survived Las Vegas shooting say they won’t get help from $11M fund due to proposed rules, http://abc7.com/oc-sisters-who-survived-vegas-shooting-say-they-wont-get-money-from-fund/2710576/
3. Reuters, Hundreds of Las Vegas shooting victims file lawsuits in California court https://www.reuters.com/article/us-lasvegas-shooting-lawsuit/hundreds-of-las-vegas-shooting-victims-file-lawsuits-in-california-court-idUSKBN1DK2OX

Pharmaceuticals Litigation Draws Plaintiffs to California

They have been dubbed “litigation tourists” and according to a 6-year study, they make up about 90 percent of the

They have been dubbed “litigation tourists” and according to a 6-year study, they make up about 90 percent of the plaintiffs in pharmaceuticals litigation in California. These plaintiffs with no California connection are flooding the courts and critics argue that they impede the chances of residents who are looking to have their day in court.

Justice group study identifies flux of “litigation tourists”

According to a study recently published by the Civil Justice Association of California, most plaintiffs in California cases against pharmaceutical companies are these so-called “litigation tourists”, who do not reside in California – and have no connection to the state – but choose to file here because of a perceived advantage.

The study looked at product liability lawsuits filed against pharmaceutical companies in Los Angeles and San Diego between January 2010 and May 2016. It included more than 2,900 cases which included more than 25,500 plaintiffs.

Not only are individual plaintiffs likely to be non-California residents but more than two-thirds of the pharmaceuticals cases do not have any California residents in the entire group of plaintiffs. In nine out of every ten lawsuits included in the study, the plaintiffs were represented by one of 25 law firms and none of those firms had California residents make up more than one third of their plaintiffs.

Incentives for non-California tort plaintiffs

There are a number of likely contributing factors to the rise in non-resident lawsuits:

1. California has garnered a nationwide reputation as being plaintiff-friendly
2. California courts apply a different standard from most other states for admissions of expert witness testimony
3. The state recognizes what has become known as the “innovator liability theory” which allows a manufacturer of a brand-name drug to be held liable when patients are injured by generic alternatives that were manufactured and sold by third parties
4. Unlike most other states, California has no cap on punitive damages

Last year’s state supreme court case, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, decided in August 2016, appears to apply a stamp of approval to the practice. In that case, 86 Californians were joined by nearly 600 non-residents to sue the defendant drug manufacturer over alleged injuries related to a prescription blood thinner. The out-of-state defendant argued that the California court did not have jurisdiction because none of its operations took place in California. But the California Supreme Court permitted the lawsuit because the company had marketed and distributed the product in the state.

Critics point out that using California’s judicial resources for forum-shopping plaintiffs with no ties to the Golden State does not help residents who already face an uphill battle gaining access to the courts due to the state court budget crisis that has been ongoing since 2008.

California personal injury lawyer

A personal injury, including those caused by pharmaceuticals, can leave victims and their families with physical, financial, and emotional damage. Los Angeles attorney personal injury lawyer Sean Salamati understands the impact of these events and can help you determine your best next legal step. Contact the Salamati Law Firm at 888-259-4060 for a free consultation.

Additional Personal Injury Resources

1. Civil Justice Association of California, Out-of-State Plaintiffs: Are Out-Of-State Plaintiffs clogging California Courts?, http://cjac.org/what/research/CJAC_Out_of_State_Plaintiffs_Exec_Summary.pdf
2. California Courts, Jurisdiction and Venue: Where to file a case, http://www.courts.ca.gov/9617.htm
3. Consumer Attorneys of California, Court Funding: California’s court system is bearing a disproportionate share of state’s budget hardship – denying vital services and preventing many Californians from ever having their day in court, https://www.caoc.org/index.cfm?pg=CourtFunding

California Rains Cause Surge in LA County Car Crashes

Unprecedented rains in a historically dry area have triggered flash floods and a massive surge in freeway crashes, reports the

Unprecedented rains in a historically dry area have triggered flash floods and a massive surge in freeway crashes, reports the Los Angeles Times. At the beginning of the rainy period last November, the California Highway Patrol noted a whopping 570 percent increase in traffic accidents throughout Los Angeles County, as motorists struggled with slick roads, poor visibility and hazardous conditions. According to reports, heavy storms inundated San Luis Obispo County with more than two inches of rain, and Brentwood’s Getty Center didn’t fare much better with more than an inch of water. The sudden uptick in motor vehicle crashes created havoc and gridlock along several highly-trafficked freeways in Southern California.

The spike in freeway crashes, some of which involved multiple vehicles and large trucks, left many motorists with serious injuries requiring hospitalization and medical treatment. Unfortunately, weather-related traffic accidents in California are not uncommon, says personal injury attorney Sean Salamati, who represents victims in the greater Los Angeles area. Salamati has vast experience handling personal injury car accident claims involving commercial vehicles and passenger cars.

Liability issues in bad weather accidents

Treacherous road conditions, whether caused by rain, ice or fallen debris, can lead to dangerous situations for anyone behind the wheel. In car accidents caused by bad weather, who, if anyone, is legally responsible for damages?

In California, liability for any type of auto accident comes down to negligence. Was the driver exercising reasonable care given the current weather conditions at the time of the crash? A light shower might only call for a slight reduction in speed, whereas a heavy downpour would require a reasonable driver to turn on their headlights, slow down considerably and accommodate for longer stopping distances, in case of sudden breaking.

Snow, rain, fog, ice and sleet can reduce tire traction, visibility and brake performance. When motorists are driving in bad weather conditions, they should take extra care and adjust their speed accordingly. Those who fail to do so and are involved in a collision may have a difficult time seeking appropriate compensation for property damage, medical bills and other related losses.

If you are injured because another motorist failed to drive safely in bad weather, or was driving too fast for conditions, the Salamati Law Firm is here to help.

Protect your rights to compensation

As a veteran California injury attorney who specializes in car accident claims, Sean Salamati leverages the resources and experience to build a strong case that documents all injuries, pain and suffering, and economic losses. His legal team can uncover whether hazardous road debris, careless driving, alcohol impairment, or other factors contributed to the crash.

Working with a trusted auto accident lawyer in Los Angeles with proven case results can make a major difference in your ability to successfully file a claim and recover fair monetary compensation for your losses.

To set up a free, no-obligation case evaluation at our Los Angeles office, we invite you to call 888-259-4060. 

More “car accidents caused by rain” resources:

1. LA Times, Rain triggers 570% surge in Los Angeles County freeway crashes http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-rain-weather-socal-20161121-story.html
2. LA Times, Drenched: How L.A. went from bone-dry to 216% of normal rainfall in four months, http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-rain-record-la-20170123-story.html

Los Angeles Man Killed Following Altercation in Bar

In the early morning hours of December 16, a Los Angeles man was struck and killed by a car following

In the early morning hours of December 16, a Los Angeles man was struck and killed by a car following an altercation in a North Hollywood bar. The victim, whose name was not immediately released by police, evidently had been drinking in the bar and fought with the bouncer shortly before closing.

He and the bouncer, Ernest Reyes, struggled until he fell in the street. At that point, the victim was struck by a car which accelerated and left the scene without stopping.
The car was described in the Los Angeles Times as a “dark-colored vehicle with dark-tinted windows.”

Police arrested Reyes, who is 34, on suspicion of murder. His bail was set at $2 million. The Times noted that the sequence of events was unclear, including whether Reyes shoved the man into the street. Police are currently investigating. They are also exploring whether security cameras can yield a picture of the car and driver who struck the victim.

Multiple legal claims possible

While law enforcement is still investigating and fault cannot yet be assigned, the incident illustrates several points of California law regarding vehicle accidents, pedestrian responsibility, and personal injury.

Negligence laws in California apply to both vehicles and pedestrians. A car that strikes a pedestrian is not always at fault. Hypothetically, if a pedestrian darts into a street directly before a car, a jury could find the pedestrian 100% at fault. If, however, a pedestrian is jay-walking and a car is going too fast to stop, a jury might find that the driver bears the preponderance of blame. Under state law, a jury could find the driver 75% negligent and the pedestrian 25%. Any damages awarded would be split accordingly.

Second, there is the issue of driver behavior. News reports indicate that the victim was killed by a hit-and-run accident. A hit-and-run is an accident in which the driver of a vehicle that has struck someone does not stop. Under California law, drivers who strike someone, whether they are injured, killed, or unharmed, must stop. It is illegal to leave the scene of an accident. If someone was killed in the accident, leaving it is a felony offense.

If the driver is found, the victim’s family in this case could bring civil charges under California hit-and-run law.

Third, the incident raises the issue of personal injury law. Under California personal injury statutes, someone can be responsible for personal injury if they carelessly caused personal injury or death. Careless means that a person knew or should have known a situation was dangerous but did not take proper care to prevent it.

While we do not know the circumstances until the police investigations are complete, a party who pushes another party into the path of an oncoming vehicle could be found to have caused personal injury. However, if the victim stumbled rather than was propelled into the roadway, or did not notice an oncoming vehicle due to inebriation, a jury might find that the victim was partly or even entirely responsible. Because the victim was hit by a car, the driver of the car may also bear a large responsibility.

In this particular case, the accident resulted in death. The families and loved ones of the deceased can bring suits in cases of car accidents, pedestrian accidents, and personal injury.

Have you lost a family member in a hit and run or other traffic incident?

The Salamati Law Firm specializes in vehicle and pedestrian accidents and personal injury cases. If you or your family face any of the situations above, contact our skilled Los Angeles car accident attorneys today for a free, no-obligation consultation. There is no fee unless we win your case. We have years of experience fighting for the rights of people like you.

Nominees for “10 Worst Toys in 2016” Released

Toy stores are beefing up inventories with the latest products and gadgets as holiday shopping is in full swing. Once

Toy stores are beefing up inventories with the latest products and gadgets as holiday shopping is in full swing. Once again, the consumer advocacy group World Against Toys Causing Harm, Inc. (W.A.T.C.H.) has published its nominees for the “10 Worst Toys” of 2016 in the hopes of keeping dangerous toys out of the hands of small children. The organization releases such a list every year in an effort to prevent needless toy-related injuries, which cause more than 250,000 emergency room visits annually.

W.A.T.C.H. is urging both parents and caregivers to take caution when buying toys for their children this holiday season, as many are sold without adequate warnings about choking, suffocation and injury hazards. Dozens of the recalled toys in recent years were found to have design or manufacturing defects, or were put on the marketplace without sufficient testing.

Safety advocates say that between 2010 and 2014, an estimated 61 American children died because of toy-related injuries. Their 2016 “10 Worst Toys” nominees spotlight some of the many hazards posed to children.

10 Most Hazardous Toys for 2016

According to the W.A.T.C.H. report, the following ten products have inadequate warnings and may be extremely dangerous for children.

1. Banzai Bump and Bounce Body Bumpers – Manufactured by ToyQuest, these inflatable suits worn by children allow kids to bounce off one another. However, there is no protective equipment included and this toy has a potential for impact injuries
2. Kids Time Baby Children’s Elephant Pillow – Sold on Amazon, this plush stuffed animal comes with no warnings about the suffocation risks for infants.
3. Peppa Pig’s Muddy Puddles Family – These cute figurines are marketed for children ages 2 and 3 or older, but without warnings about small plastic parts that pose choking hazards for this age group
4. Slimeball Slinger – Much like a slingshot, the Slimeball Slinger lets kids launch projectiles more than 30 feet, but the toy has the potential to cause severe eye injuries
5. Nerf Rival Apollo XV-700 Blaster – Nerf ammunition may be soft, but it can still result in serious eye injuries. The package includes photos of children wearing safety masks, though no protective gear is included.
6. Flying Heroes Superman Launcher – A winged superhero figurine sold at major retail outlets, this product has the potential for face and eye injuries when used by small children
7. Peppy Pups – This playpen toy, sold at ToysR US, is sold with a 31-inch long cord, posing strangulation risks to children aged 3 and younger.
8. The Good Dinosaur Galloping Butch – Marketed to children 3 or older, this T-Rex toy has a sharp plastic tail that can cause significant puncture wound injuries.
9. Warcraft Doomhammer – Blunt impact injuries are a potential danger when children play with this heavy weight plastic hammer
10. Baby Magic Feed and Play Baby – Two-year olds are encouraged to spoon feed this interactive baby doll, but the spoon is small enough that it could block a child’s airway if used improperly

Los Angeles toy defect lawyers

The W.A.T.C.H. report, though helpful, is far from an exhaustive list of all toys that pose dangers for choking, strangulation, puncture wounds or impact injuries. If your child is hurt by a toy that is unsafe for its intended purpose, came without adequate warnings, or was defective in some manner, you may have grounds for legal action.

To learn more about filing a product liability lawsuit in Los Angeles, we encourage you to call The Salamati Law Firm for a free, no-obligation case review. Our veteran LA personal injury attorneys stand prepared to fight for maximum compensation. Call our offices today at 888-259-4060.

Resources

1. ToySafety.org, 2016 “10 Worst Toy” List http://toysafety.org/toy-safety/2016-10-worst-toy-list/
2. ToySafety.org, 2016, Nominee List http://toysafety.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/WATCH-2016-Press-Release-With-Nominees.pdf