Sexual harassment and sex discrimination in the workplace is a pervasive problem in California. In the last year, movements such as Time’s Up and #Metoo have highlighted the problems of sexual harassment and assault. Following high-profile cases that have been reported widely in the media, Hollywood has taken up the cause. The California legislature has also been working to strengthen the rights of people in the workplace against sexual harassment, retaliation and discrimination. There are four pending bills that are currently wending their way through the legislature that could help to significantly strengthen the rights of sexual harassment and discrimination victims.
Senate Bill 820
Introduced by state Sen. Connie Leyva (D-Chino) on Jan. 3, 2018, SB-820 would bar confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements of cases involving sexual harassment, sexual assault or discrimination. The bill would void confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements as being against public policy. The bill is currently before the Judiciary Committee. This bill is important because many civil sexual harassment settlement agreements contain confidentiality clauses that prohibit the victims from divulging factual information about what happened to them. If the bill is enacted into law, these types of clauses would be void and unenforceable, allowing victims to share what happened to them with others so that they can be warned.



When truck drivers cause accidents in California, the trucking companies often aggressively defend against personal injury claims. They may dispute the liability of their drivers outright or try to argue the comparative negligence of the victims. The defense attorneys may go to great lengths in order to try to argue that the injuries that the victims suffered are not as severe as they claim, including searching through social media posts. In
Automatic gate accidents in Los Angeles can cause serious injuries or deaths. In these types of cases, there are several parties that might be liable. The property owners or lessors may be responsible if they negligently retain or repair the gates or if the knew or should have known about an existing defect and failed to repair it. If the automatic gate failed because of a defective part, the part’s manufacturer may be liable to pay damages. Finally, people who are injured in gate accidents may also share liability. In Park v. Oh, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC569323, the plaintiff and the property owner shared liability.
Most people have heard about the McDonald’s coffee case and might have misconceptions about it. The case, Liebeck v. McDonald’s, in which a 79-year-old woman ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee in a drive-through and then burned herself by spilling it garnered national attention. The case is still the subject of debate about whether or not the claim was frivolous. Many people view the case as the classic example of a frivolous lawsuit, but the facts show that it was not.
Employers may be liable for the negligence of their employees when their employees injure others during the course and scope of their employment. Employers hold vicarious liability for the negligent acts of their employees while they are acting in the course and scope of their jobs. In Jay H. et al. v. John Keith Bullard, Waterfront Enterprises, Inc., dba Newport Landing Restaurant and Oyster Bar, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2014-00718428-CU-PA-CJC, the limits of the employer’s vicarious liability were explored.
What are coup and contrecoup brain injuries? Head injuries can be some of the most devastating types of injuries that people might suffer in California. Traumatic events that injure the head may cause coup and contrecoup brain injuries. These types of injuries may cause lifelong disability or lead to death. If you or your loved one has suffered a coup or contrecoup brain injury because of the negligent or wrongful acts of other people or entities, you might want to seek help from an experienced brain injury lawyer in Los Angeles.
Workplace deaths from industrial accidents is on the Rise in the U.S. according to recent studies. Most Californians do not go to their jobs with the idea that they could be injured or killed at their workplaces. Unfortunately, many people suffer serious injuries or fatalities while they are working on the job each year. Recent data shows that the number of workplace fatalities across industry sectors sharply increased from 2015 to 2016. If you have lost your loved one in a workplace accident, it is important that you speak to an experienced Los Angeles personal injury attorney for help.
In California, property owners have a duty to warn patrons of unsafe conditions that exist on their properties. If there is a hazardous condition that exists that the property owners are aware of, they also must repair the condition so that visitors remain safe. In a recent case that was decided in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case No. SC112366, these duties that are owed were illustrated. People who have suffered serious injuries because of the negligence of property owners might want to talk to an experienced premises liability lawyer in Los Angeles.
Property owners and operators in California owe duties of care to protect people who are legally present on their properties from dangerous conditions. Property owners must either know about the existence of the hazardous condition or should know about it for liability to attach. They must take steps to correct hazards about which they know or should have known and to warn visitors to their property about their existence. In Lefebvre v. NC Valley Baseball, LLC, Stanislaus County Superior Court No. 2019247, the court considered the concepts of notice and of assumption of the risk in a case involving a man who was injured at a batting cage by a baseball.