California Accident Attorneys Blog

Published on: August 22, 2025

Recovery of Damages for Exacerbation of a Lower Back Spinal Injury Following a Motor Vehicle Accident in California

Motor vehicle accidents often cause serious and life-altering injuries. Among the most common and debilitating are lower back injuries, including herniated discs, spinal fractures, and nerve damage. For many victims, the accident does not create a brand-new injury but instead worsens a pre-existing spinal condition. California law recognizes the right of injured persons to recover compensation when a negligent driver exacerbates or aggravates a prior injury. This principle is vital in cases involving lower back injuries, as many people already suffer from degenerative disc disease or prior back problems before a crash.

In this article, we’ll explore how California law treats the recovery of damages for exacerbation of lower back spinal injuries, highlight the relevant California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI), and discuss strategies for proving and maximizing recovery in these complex cases.

The Legal Principle: “Take the Plaintiff as You Find Them”

Published on: August 19, 2025

Why You Should Hire an Attorney After Being Injured as a Passenger in an Uber or Lyft in California

by Steven M. Sweat

Ridesharing has reshaped transportation in California, but when a crash happens while you’re a paying passenger, the aftermath can be confusing. “Who pays for my medical bills?” “Do I sue the driver, the other motorist, or the rideshare company?” “What about lost wages, pain and suffering, or long-term care?”

Here’s the short answer: as a passenger, you’re almost never at fault—but getting the full compensation you deserve still isn’t automatic. An experienced California rideshare injury attorney can turn a messy, multi-insurer puzzle into a clear, strategic claim.

Below is a practical guide to why hiring counsel matters, how rideshare insurance actually works in California, and what a lawyer does behind the scenes to protect your recovery.

Published on: April 3, 2025

California Court Rules on Left Hand Turn Auto Accident Claim

by Steven M. Sweat

Left-hand turn accidents often occur when the driver making a left turn fails to watch for oncoming traffic before proceeding. In Drury v. Ryan, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. G063080, the Court of Appeal considered whether a trial court judge committed a prejudicial error when he failed to instruct the jury on the defendant’s per se negligence in violating the left-hand turn statute.

Factual and Procedural Background

Kathy Ryan was preparing to turn left into a grocery store parking lot after traveling north on Highland Springs Avenue in Beaumont on Aug. 10, 2018, at 4 pm. The southbound roadway had three lanes she needed to cross, and the area did not have any traffic lights. The drivers in the two lanes nearest to her yielded and motioned for her to turn. She stated she didn’t see any vehicles in the third lane and turned left across all three lanes to enter the parking lot.

Published on: October 18, 2024

Defendant Not Liable for Tree on Their Property Causing Accident

by Steven M. Sweat

In some car accidents in California, third parties might be partially at fault for failing to maintain property in a reasonably safe condition to prevent foreseeable injuries. In Union Pacific Railroad Co. v. Superior Court, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. F087132, the California Court of Appeal considered whether Union Pacific Railroad could be held negligent for its failure to remove a tree that was located within the clear zone next to a highway that was involved in a fatal wreck.

Factual and Procedural Background

Robert and Elise Sandford were driving a motorhome north on State Route 99 near Madera, California on May 25, 2016, when they struck a Freightliner truck driving north on the highway driven by Deon Detes Abrams, Sr. The collision caused both vehicles to leave the road and hit a tree on adjacent property owned by Union Pacific Railroad Co. The vehicles burst into flames, and all of the occupants of both died.

Published on: September 27, 2024

California Nursing Home Arbitration Agreement Not Enforceable for Wrongful Death Claims

by Steven M. Sweat

Many California nursing homes ask residents or their family members to sign arbitration agreements as a part of the admissions process. These agreements purport to mandate arbitration instead of litigation when disputes arise. Some nursing homes try to force people into arbitration over nursing home abuse claims. However, arbitration agreements must be valid, enforceable, and conscionable to be enforced. In Maxwell v. Atria Management Company, LLC, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. A168043, the Court of Appeal decided whether a trial court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration was valid when two adult children held separate powers of attorney and there were questions about whether the agreement was properly executed.

Factual and Procedural Background

Trudy Maxwell lived in Atria Park, a nursing home operated by Atria Management Company, LLC in San Mateo. In 1999, she had signed a durable power of attorney that named her husband as her agent-in-fact with her son, James Maxwell the III, named as the successor, and Marybeth as the second successor in the interest of the DPOA. In 2005, Trudy signed an advanced healthcare directive in which she named her husband as her agent-in-fact for healthcare decisions and listed her son, James Maxwell III, as the first alternate and her daughter, Marybeth, as the second alternate.

Published on: September 23, 2024

How Long Does It Typically Take to Settle a Personal Injury Case in California?

by Steven M. Sweat

Personal injury cases can be a complicated and lengthy process that often leaves individuals questioning how long they will wait for a resolution. In California, the timeline for settling a personal injury case is influenced by various factors, making it essential for plaintiffs to understand what to expect throughout this journey. Knowing the average duration can provide peace of mind during an inherently stressful period.

The duration of a personal injury case can vary significantly based on numerous elements, including the nature of the injuries sustained, the complexity surrounding liability, and how well all parties cooperate. Additionally, the availability of crucial evidence can either expedite or prolong the settlement process. Understanding these factors offers invaluable insight into the intricacies involved in resolving personal injury claims.

In this article, we will explore the typical timeline for settling personal injury cases in California. We’ll break down the phases of the process—from initial consultations to potential litigation—and provide clarity on the various elements that might influence how long it takes to reach a conclusion. By highlighting these aspects, we aim to equip readers with the knowledge they need to navigate their personal injury claims effectively.

Published on: August 5, 2024

California Court Rules on Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress Claim

by Steven M. Sweat

When someone witnesses their loved one being seriously injured because of the negligent actions of another person or entity, they have a right to pursue compensation for the negligent infliction of emotional distress when what they witnessed traumatizes them. While this cause of action is typically used in cases involving someone who visually witnesses an incident and its aftermath, the California Supreme Court recently considered a case in which a woman’s mother heard the sounds of a serious car crash and was traumatized when she realized her daughter had suffered serious injuries. In Downey v. City of Riverside, Cal. Supreme Ct. Case No. S280322, the California Supreme Court decided whether the cause of action requires the plaintiff to have immediate awareness of the defendant’s negligence that caused their loved one’s accident and injuries.

Factual and Procedural Background

Jayde Downey was giving her daughter, Malyah Jane Vance, driving directions on her cell phone while Vance was driving. Vance was driving near the intersection of Via Zapata and Canyon Crest Drive at the time. While giving her instructions, Downey heard Vance exclaim “Oh!” followed by the sounds of breaking glass and crunching metal, so she immediately knew her daughter had been involved in a car crash. Since Vance did not respond any further, Downey knew that she had likely suffered severe injuries in the crash that prevented her from talking. A passerby picked up the phone and told Downey to stop talking because he needed to try to find her daughter’s pulse.

Published on: July 19, 2024

Understanding Motorcycle Lane Splitting in California

by Steven M. Sweat

Motorcycle lane splitting, the practice of riding a motorcycle between lanes of slow or stopped traffic, has been a topic of much debate among motorists, motorcyclists, and legislators. In California, it’s not only a common sight but also a legal maneuver under specific conditions. This article delves into the legalities, safety aspects, and the relevant California Vehicle Codes (CVC) governing lane splitting.

The Legal Landscape

California is the first and only state in the United States to explicitly legalize lane splitting. The practice was formally recognized by the state legislature in 2016 with the passage of Assembly Bill 51, which added Section 21658.1 to the California Vehicle Code. This section empowers the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to develop educational guidelines relating to lane splitting in a manner that would ensure the safety of both motorcyclists and other motorists.

Published on: June 27, 2024

The Dangers of Head-On Collisions in California

by Steven M. Sweat

Head-on collisions are among the most dangerous types of motor vehicle accidents, often resulting in severe injuries or fatalities. In California, a state known for its extensive network of highways and roads, these accidents pose a significant threat to drivers and passengers alike. Understanding the causes, consequences, and preventive measures of head-on collisions is essential for promoting road safety. This blog post delves into the dangers of head-on collisions in California and offers practical advice on how to avoid them.

Understanding Head-On Collisions

A head-on collision occurs when two vehicles traveling in opposite directions crash into each other frontally. The force of impact is often immense due to the combined speed of both vehicles, making these accidents particularly catastrophic. Several factors contribute to the occurrence of head-on collisions, including driver error, road conditions, and environmental factors.

Published on: June 12, 2024

Construction Worker Barred from Suing for Personal Injury

by Steven M. Sweat

In some situations, an employee of a subcontractor on a worksite might be able to file a lawsuit against the employer of another worker who injures them through third-party liability. However, the California Supreme Court has previously held that a company that hires an independent contractor is generally not liable to third parties injured because of the contractor’s negligence while working. In CBRE v. Superior Court of San Diego County, Cal. Ct. App. Case No. D083130, the Court of Appeal decided whether a worker who was injured on a worksite could file a lawsuit against the company that hired the general contractor that subcontracted with the worker’s employer when the worker was shocked by a live wire.

Factual and Procedural Background

Jake Johnson was an electrical foreman employed by PCF Electric (PCF). Property Reserve, Inc. (PRI) owned an office building that needed renovations to prepare for a new tenant. PRI signed the lease agreement with the new tenant on April 9, 2019, with the move-in scheduled for June 1. CBRE managed the building owned by PRI. PRI accepted a bid by Crew Builders to serve as the general contractor and perform the upgrades, and Crew hired PCF Electric as a subcontractor to perform the electrical work.