BLOG

This evening at about 5:00 p.m., six people were injured in a multi-vehicle crash on Seal Beach Boulevard near the 405 freeway.  According to news reports, the collision involved three vehicles, two of which seem to have collided head-on.  Among the injured in this Seal Beach crash were four adults and two children, two of whom had to be cut from a vehicle by emergency rescue workers.  The Orange County Register, citing official sources, has reported that three men, a woman and two girls were taken to hospitals.  The severity of the injuries and whether any were life threatening was unknown at the time of the Register report.  The cause of the accident is still under investigation. 

See the Orange County Register article and photographs HERE.

From the damage done to the vehicles, as can be seen in the Register photographs, it is nothing short of a miracle any of the vehicle occupants survived this horrific crash.  The damage done seems to reflect a very significant, probably high speed, impact between at least two of the vehicles.  The initial impression from the aftermath of the accident is that two SUVs struck each other head-on (for some unknown reason) and then spun off into a third automobile, a pick up truck.  Once the crash victims have recovered sufficiently, the police investigating the accident should have a better idea of its cause.  Because of the severity of this collision and the extent of the injuries suffered, there is little doubt a complete accident reconstruction will be performed in order to piece together just what happened.  Such a reconstruction will likely utilize witness statements, skid analysis, metal deformation, points of impact and rest for the vehicles , and location of debris in order to best determine the precise cause.  

Compensation for the victims of automobile accidents caused by negligent drivers should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a driver operates their vehicle in a negligent or reckless manner so as to cause a head-on accident, they should be held accountable for the injuries and damages they impose on their victims. An Orange County injury lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims. Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling Orange County automobile accident cases, including those involving head-on collisions.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a loved one been injured or killed in an Orange County auto accident?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above. This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

This past Sunday afternoon two runners in San Diego County were attacked by what has been described as a pack of pit bulls.  One of the runners reportedly lost chunks from his legs during the vicious mauling.  According to a story reported by the Associated Press,  the most seriously injured victim, 21-year-old Richard Garritson, underwent surgery to close the wounds to his legs.  His younger brother, John Garritson, tried to fend the dogs off with a stick and was also attacked by at least eight dogs.  Four of the dogs were put down at the owner's request, but the County Sheriff's Department is still considering whether to press criminal charges.   

See the AP/Yahoo News story HERE.

Dog attacks like the one above are both tragic and frustrating.  Large breed dogs, especially those with the reputation of pit bulls, should be confined by a fence or tethered unless the owner is otherwise under control.  The County of San Diego actually has ordinances intended to impose on dog owners a certain level of control and/or confinement over their animals.  A failure to keep dogs from roaming at large, as apparently happened in the case above, may result in a criminal charge against the owner.  (See San Diego County Code, Sec. 62.669. Restraint of Dogs Required).  Aside from criminal culpability, the owner of the pit bulls involved in the attack above face civil liability under California's dog bite law.  Under the Civil Code Section 3342, a dog owner is strictly liable if their dog bites and injures someone, regardless of whether or not the dog was known to have a vicious propensity.  While there are defenses available to the dog owner, much more often than not the owner (or their homeowner's insurance carrier) will be obligated to pay for all of the injuries and damages caused when their dog bites.  Imposing this civil obligation on dog owners is one more way of trying to ensure compliance with dog restraint laws.

Compensation for the victims of vicious dog attacks should be an important concern for all Californians.  When an innocent victim is attacked and seriously injured or killed, the dog’s owner should be held accountable for all of the injuries and damages suffered. An Orange County injury lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims. Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a family member been a victim of a dog attack?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above. This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

According to an ABC news report, a Safeway security guard was fired after interrogating a 4-year-old girl for alleged shoplifting after he saw her eat from a bag of apricots and put the bag back on the shelf.  The little girl’s father apparently hadn’t noticed what his daughter had done and was quite surprised when he and his daughter were stopped by security after leaving the Safeway in Everett, Washington.  After the initial stop, the guard then interrogated Savannah Harp about the alleged theft.  The girl’s mother, Alissa Jones, reported that the guard told Harp’s father that the girl was banned from the store and that Safeway would be pressing charges.  Savannah, who can’t read or write yet, was forced to scribble on the piece of paper, presumably an acknowledgement of her wrongdoing.  Generally, anyone under the age of 14 is presumed incapable of committing a crime because they cannot appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct. 
Safeway officials were apparently outraged over the guard’s treatment of the little girl and issued a formal apology to her family. 

See the ABC news story HERE. 

Had the incident above occurred here in California, there is little doubt Safeway and/or their guard would be held liable for false imprisonment and a whole host of other torts.  Even though California law provides a retailer and their agent (the security guard) with a probable cause defense in situations similar to this, it would appear to have little to application to the facts here.  In order for the privilege to apply (and a defense to a civil claim to follow), the store security guard must have "probable cause" to believe the person to be detained has "unlawfully" taken or has attempted to unlawfully take merchandise from the store's premises.  Observation of a 4 year-old girl eating from a bag of apricots would hardly seem to meet that standard since the guard would have to reasonably believe the 4 year-old intended to steal or unlawfully deprive the store of their property, the apricots.  Since the so-called "merchant's privilege" would appear to have no application, the merchant and their agent would likely be civilly liable for any emotional injuries and economic damages sustained.  Since Safeway seems to have at least taken the right approach after the incident came to light, they may have spared themselves from the potential for a punitive damages award.

Compensation for the victims of store security misconduct should be an important concern for all Californians.  When an innocent patron is apprehended and then detained by security, without adequate cause, the retailer should be held accountable and compensation paid to the victim.  An Orange County false arrest lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you been a victim of an unlawful arrrest or detention by store security?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above.  This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.  

An incredible story of malpractice has been reported out of Miami, Florida.  A number of alleged victims have come forward alleging a woman posing as a doctor and promising buttocks enhancement pumped their behinds with a toxic concoction of cement, superglue and flat-tire sealant.  According to a report by the Associated Press, the "doctor", identified as Oneal Ron Morris (who police say was born a man and identifies as a woman) was arrested last week after nearly a year of being sought and charged with practicing medicine without a license, causing serious bodily injury.  One victim, who was reportedly looking to get a job at a nightclub and wanted a curvier figure, paid Morris $700 for the injections in 2010. Morris allegedly used some type of tubing and inserted the toxic chemicals into her backside during a painful procedure.  This resulted in hospitalization and extensive home health care, according to the AP report.  Other alleged victims have also suffered serious injuries.

See the Yahoo news/Assoiated Press story HERE.

What the story above demonstrates is that many people looking to have cosmetic surgery turn to those health care providers offering the least expensive treatment.  Not only can this prove embarrassing but also potentially deadly.  A patient looking to have any type of cosmetic procedure should first at least do some investigation regarding the qualifications of the doctor selected.  One of the easiest ways to do this in California is to check with the Medical Board to see if the doctor is licensed and/or board certified in a relevant specialty, such as plastic surgery.  Also, the Board's website contains information regarding any prior discipline.  Second, in some counties (such as the County of Orange) anyone can examine the Superior Court website to see if the doctor has been sued and, if so, for what reason and when.  It should be remembered that the filing of a lawsuit in and of itself does not prove anything as some malpractice suits are filed by the patient simply because they have experienced a less than optimal result.  In addition to this, a potential patient can simply "Google" the doctor's name to see what reviews, if any, have been given by former patients.  Doing all of these things may spare a potential patient embarrassment, serious injuries or even death.

Compensation for victims of medical malpractice committed by unqualified cosmetic surgeons should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a physician without the necessary credentials and training harms a patient, they should be held accountable.  An Orange County medical malpractice attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has over 20 years of experience handling personal injury and medical malpractice cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a loved one been the victim of a cosmetic surgery nightmare?

• Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above.This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

Slip and fall accidents are unfortunately common, especially in places of business. The familiarity we all feel within or just outside our home is often lost when we patronize an unfamiliar place of business. This is particularly true in a retail environment where the walking surface can be significantly altered by slick tile, a wet floor or some sort of spill. A fall on hard ground can often be devastating and cause such injuries as broken ankles, knees and wrists, and even traumatic brain injuries. When these injuries and the resulting damages are caused by a business owner's negligence, the patron should do everything they reasonably can to ensure they will be compensated. Otherwise, the physical, emotional and financial impact could be life-altering.

As simple as these recommendations sound, they are sometimes difficult to accomplish in the aftermath of an injury-causing fall. Perhaps the most important evidence gathering to be done is in documenting the cause of the fall. If at all possible, the patron (or someone with them) should take at least a cell phone camera picture of anything on the walking surface that might have caused the fall. This would include any tripping hazards (such as a protruding piece of concrete or flooring, etc.) or slipping hazards (such as liquid on a tile floor, etc.). If there is any evidence at the scene that the condition came from a particular source or has been in existence for some period of time, that too should be documented, ideally with photographs. In every instance, it is important to report the accident to the business owner promptly. A delay in reporting often raises doubts as to the happening of the accident, and it deprives the business owner of the opportunity to do their own investigation into what may have caused the accident. Finally, the injured party should always seek medical attention unless the injuries are clearly superficial. Any visible sign of injury (bruises, cuts, etc.) should be documented with photographs at the earliest opportunity.

When a fall victim presents the above documentation to their injury attorney, that lawyer will likely have a much better chance of proving his client's case and obtaining an optimal recovery. Medical expenses and lost wages may be reimbursed, and the client's pain and suffering will be fairly compensated in that scenario.

Have you or a loved one been injured in a fall caused by someone else's negligence?

Compensation for the victims of fall accidents, caused by another’s negligence, should be an important concern for all Californians. When a fall occurs on someone else’s property because of the owner’s negligence, the owner should be held accountable. An Orange County injury lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims. Mr. Ralph has more than 19 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type. He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.
 

According to media reports, a four-vehicle crash on Saturday night in La Habra has left one person dead and two suspects under arrest for felony hit-and-run.  The collision reportedly occurred at about 5:30 p.m. at the intersection of Cypress Street and Lambert Road.  The victim has been identified as 20-year-old, Joseph Quezada, who was transported from the scene to UCI Medical Center where he died from his injuries.   The accident involved a white Toyota 4-Runner, a black Nissan Xterra, a U-Haul truck and a blue Hyundai Accent that Quezada was driving.  The Orange County Register has reported that the driver and passenger of the U-Haul truck ran from the scene and were later caught by police officers.
Richard Ambriz, 18, of Santa Fe Springs and Dustin Lish, 19 of La Habra, were arrested on suspicion of felony hit-and-run.  The La Habra Police Department is still investigating the cause of the crash, and anyone who may have witnessed the accident is encouraged to call 562-905-9760.

See the Orange County Register story HERE. 

While the precise cause of this tragic crash is a mystery, those running from the scene have demonstrated what is generally regarded as "consciousness of guilt".  The flight of a person immediately after the commission of a crime, or after he is accused of a crime, is not sufficient in itself to establish his guilt, but is a fact which, if proved, may be considered by the jury in the light of all other proved facts in deciding whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty.  The weight to which this circumstance is entitled is a matter for the jury to decide.  In short, when a driver flees the scene of an accident an inference may be drawn that they were responsible for causing the accident and the injuries or death that resulted.  In the case above, the police will have to reconstruct the accident based on witness statements, skid marks, post-accident debris, points of rest of the vehicles and metal deformation of the vehicles.  This will enable them to determine speed, direction of travel, evasive action (if any) and whether a particular driver may have violated another driver's right of way.  On top of this reconstruction evidence, there will be the inferential evidence of flight, which should allow the police to assign responsibility for the accident and Quezada's death.

Compensation for the victims of automobile accidents caused by hit-and-run drivers should be an important concern for all Californians.  When a driver operates their vehicle in a negligent or reckless manner so as to cause a serious or fatal accident, they should be held accountable.  An Orange County auto accident lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling Orange County automobile accident cases, including those involving wrongful death.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a loved one been injured or killed in a motor vehicle accident caused by a negligent, hit-and-run driver?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above. This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

The number of people having plastic surgery each year has grown steadily since statistics for these procedures were first compiled.  For example, almost 9.5 million cosmetic surgical and nonsurgical procedures were performed in the United States in 2010.  The most frequently performed surgical procedure was breast augmentation and the most popular nonsurgical procedure was injections of Botulinum Toxin Type A (including Botox and Dysport).  The top five surgical procedures were:

• Breast Augmentation (318,123)
• Liposuction (289,016)
• Eyelid surgery (152,123)
• Abdominoplasty (144,929)
• Breast Reduction (138,152)

See the full list of surgical and non-surgical procedures at cosmeticsurgerystatistics.com. 

Not too surprisingly, many physicians performing cosmetic procedures are not especially qualified and often perform surgery outside their area of expertise.  In the simplest of terms, the demand for these procedures is high and a great deal of money can be made by a single physician.  Consequently, it is not uncommon for a physician to perform cosmetic surgical procedures even though the doctor is not a board certified plastic surgeon with the requisite training and experience.  Doctors who don't possess the necessary training and experience (and even some who do) can leave their patients with unacceptable and sometimes horrific results.  So, how do you know when you have been a victim of plastic surgery malpractice?

The first thing to keep in mind as a patient who has undergone a cosmetic procedure is that a sub-optimal result is not always a product of malpractice.  Sometimes the poor results obtained, even though unexpected, would have occurred even in the best of surgical hands.  What generally determines whether the result was the product of medical malpractice is the opinion of a second, neutral physician.  If you have had a cosmetic procedure, and the result is unacceptable to you, seek consultation with a board certified plastic surgeon.  While it is true that physicians do not relish the idea of criticizing another doctor's work, sometimes a consulting physician will offer to repair or revise the earlier work, which is generally a sign something may have occurred that reflects poor medical practice.  If you then suspect you have been a victim of plastic surgery malpractice, you should consult a medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your options and the potential for compensation.

When a physician without the necessary credentials and training commits plastic surgery malpractice, they should be held accountable.   An Orange County medical malpractice lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims. Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling personal injury and medical malpractice cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a loved one been the victim of plastic surgery malpractice?

This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.
 

A 35-year-old bicyclist was killed on Saturday evening in a tragic accident with an Orange County Transportation Authority bus.  The victim, 35 year-old Romeo Jimenez-Zavaleta, was pronounced dead just after 6 p.m. at Mission Hospital Regional Medical Center, according to an article in the Orange County Register,  Citing official sources, the Register reported the collision occurred at the intersection of Paseo de Valencia and Alicia Parkway in the City of Laguna Hills.  Jimeniz-Zavaleta was apparently riding his bike across Alicia Parkway when he was hit by the bus making a right turn from Valencia.

See the Orange County Register article HERE.

Tragic accidents like the one above are unfortunately all too common.  When a bicyclist and a motor vehicle collide, the consequences are often profound and serious injuries are almost inescapable.  This is particularly true when the motor vehicle is a bus.  From a Google maps view of the intersection, there does not appear to be anything particularly unusual about the intersection configuration or the view a southbound, right-turning driver would have from Valencia to Alicia Parkway.  With regard to responsibility for the accident, it will have to be determined whether the bus driver turned on a red or a green light and whether Jimeniz-Zavaleta could be seen in advance of the driver executing the turn.  While it would appear the bicyclist was perhaps riding on the wrong side of the street for his direction of travel, this would not excuse the bus driver from observing the potential for an accident and taking steps to avoid it.

Compensation for victims of automobile versus bicycle collisions, caused by a negligent driver, should be an important concern for all Californians. When a driver operates their vehicle in an unlawful or reckless manner and causes a serious or fatal accident, they should be held accountable.  An Orange County bicycle accident attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has over 20 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type. He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a loved one been injured or killed in an automobile versus bicycle collision caused by another’s unlawful or negligent driving?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above. This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

According to a press release by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), United Parcel Service (UPS) must pay more than $96,000 in damages after the company fired an employee because of her disability.  The Fair Employment and Housing Commission (Commission) determined that UPS had unlawfully terminated their worker, Eva Linda Mason, in spite of the fact she was able to perform the essential functions of her job.  Ms. Mason began her employment with UPS in 1997 and, although she occasionally located packages in a warehouse, handling packages was not part of her job.  After Ms. Mason had knee surgery and took a leave of absence to recover in 2007, she continued to carry out the essential customer service functions of her job.  Nonetheless, UPS considered Ms. Mason as disabled because she had some restrictions, such as limited standing, walking, bending, and kneeling.  Because the company had a 12- month cap on the length of time employees with disabilities could be reasonably accommodated from their regular duties. UPS fired Ms. Mason in August 2008.  The Commission found this arbitrary limit of 12 months was unlawful, and ordered UPS to pay just over $96,000.00 in damages, which included a $10,000.00 administrative fine to the State.

See the DFEH press release HERE.

Under California law, where an employer draws distinctions among their employees on the basis of physical or mental disability the law is not violated by that fact alone.  Rather, drawing these distinctions is prohibited only if the adverse employment action occurs because of a disability and the disability would not prevent the employee from performing the essential duties of the job, at least not with reasonable accommodation.  In order to establish that a defendant employer has discriminated on the basis of disability in violation of the FEHA, the plaintiff employee bears the burden of proving he or she was able to do the job, with or without reasonable accommodation.  Where an employee cannot perform the essential functions of their job even with reasonable accommodation, an employer may terminate the employee.  However, in the case above, UPS did not terminate their employee for not being able to perform her job, but fired her simply because their "one-year" limit on the accommodation had been reached.  This was unlawful.

Compensation for victims of wrongful termination should be an important concern for all Californians. When a business terminates their employee because of a disability, the fired employes should be compensated. An Orange County trial lawyer with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you been a victim of a wrongful termination?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above.  This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

A tragic automobile accident in Covina early Monday morning has left a teenage girl dead from the injuries she sustained.  According to a news report by KTLA, one of two young girls hospitalized after they were hit by a car near Gladstone High School succumbed to her injuries while at County USC Medical Center.  The accident happened at 6:44 a.m. at Lark Ellen Avenue and Tudor Street, an intersection some residents say needs a traffic light.  The girls, about 14 years old, were apparently struck while in a crosswalk on Lark Ellen by a 2007 Honda Civic traveling at about 30 miles per hour southbound on the street.  The other young girl is still in critical condition.

See the KTLA news story HERE.

From a Google maps view of the intersection, it appears the roadway is relatively flat and the view of drivers unobstructed on Lark Ellen.  However, there is no traffic light on any of the four corners, and it looks as though vehicles could reach a relatively high rate of speed while traveling through that intersection.  In addition to the lack of a traffic control signal, there is most likely an element of driver inattention in this case.  Depending on the precise area of impact, it is hard to imagine the girls could not be seen in the crosswalk for some distance prior to the point of impact.  Assuming the Honda was traveling 30 miles per hour, there should have been ample time to see two pedestrians and avoid a collision, particularly when those pedestrians would have been visible from more than one hundred feet away, given the roadway is straight and flat.  At just one hundred feet, a driver traveling at 30 miles per hour has more than 2 full seconds to perceive the potential collision and react to avoid it.

Compensation for the victims of automobile accidents caused by careless drivers and/or dangerous roadways should be an important concern for all Californians. When a driver operates their vehicle in such a manner to cause or contribute to the happening of a serious or fatal accident, they should be held accountable.  Likewise, when a dangerous roadway contributes to the occurrence of a motor vehicle accident, the public entity should be held accountable.  An Orange County auto accident attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims. Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling Orange County automobile accident cases, including those involving wrongful death. He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a loved one been injured or killed in a motor vehicle accident caused by a negligent driver and/or a dangerous roadway?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above. This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

A two-vehicle collision that occurred this morning in Huntington Beach has unfortunately left an 82 year-old woman dead.  The victim, who was a passenger in a 2002 Honda driven by an 86 year-old male, was identified as 82-year-old Esther F. Kumasaka, a Huntington Beach resident.  According to a news story in the Orange County Register, Kumasaka died at the scene of the crash, which occurred about 9:38 a.m. at Bushard Street and Adams Avenue.  The driver of the Honda was injured and transported to UCI Medical Center with unknown injuries.  The driver of the other vehicle involved, a 2011 Jeep, was identified as a 33 year-old female.  She was treated at the scene and released.

See the Orange County Register article HERE.

The general location of the accident above was also the scene of a fatal, five-car crash on October.  While the intersection is controlled by traffic lights, there could be issues with sight-distance that might contribute to the happening of accidents.  For example, there are block wall fences very near the intersection which might interfere with a driver's ability to see vehicles coming from around corners or on perpendicular streets.  Additionally, it is possible that the traffic light configuration (especially if there is a flashing yellow arrow) could contribute to driver confusion and the occurrence of an accident.  A complete accident reconstruction would aid in determining the precise cause of the Kumasaka accident, and it should be performed by the Huntington Beach Police Department.

Compensation for the victims of automobile accidents caused by careless drivers and/or dangerous roadways should be an important concern for all Californians. When a driver operates their vehicle in such a manner to cause a serious or fatal accident, they should be held accountable.  Likewise, when a dangerous roadway contributes to the happening of a motor vehicle accident, the public entity should be held accountable.  An Orange County auto accident attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims. Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling Orange County automobile accident cases, including those involving wrongful death. He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you or a loved one been injured or killed in a motor vehicle accident caused by a negligent driver and/or a dangerous roadway?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above. This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter. A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.

Last Wednesday, a 28 year-old, pregnant mother, Nicole Leszczynski, and her husband, Marcin, were arrested at a Safeway store in Honolulu for shoplifting when they forgot to pay for two sandwiches they ate while shopping.  To make matters even worse, because their 2 year-old daughter was with the couple when the incident occurred, she was taken away from her family and into state custody.  The Leszcynski family had only recently moved to Hawaii from California when the now nationally publicized incident occurred.  Nicole and Marcin were handcuffed, taken to the police station and released only after paying their bail and being held for several hours.

See the AP/Yahoo News story HERE.

In California, and in Hawaii, the crime of theft or shoplifting requires that the actor intend to permanently deprive the owner of their property.  In the case above, assuming that the Leszczynskis intended to pay for the sandwiches but simply forgot the wrappers in the cart at the check-out line, there was no crime.  In that scenario, their intent was not to deprive Safeway of their property.  Their actions in eating the sandwiches openly while shopping would seem to suggest they were not intending to conceal a crime.  Instead, their condcut would be consistent with an honest mistake, a lapse of memory.  Under the law, generally there must be a nexus between the act required to commit a crime and the intent to do so.

While it would appear there may not have been a crime committed, the store security involved in the Leszczynskis' apprehension was likely entitled under the law to detain the couple.  However, under the law in Hawaii, just like California, the store owner or their agent is only permitted to detain someone for a reasonable length of time to conduct an investigation, the so-called "merchant's privilege.".  Once it is determined no crime has been committed, however, the person or persons detained should not be formally arrested and charged with a crime.  In California, if the store agent goes beyond the limits of the merchant's privilege and prosecutes a patron unlawfully, the store can be held liable for false arrest and perhaps a host of other civil wrongs.

Compensation for the victims of store security misconduct should be an important concern for all Californians.  When an innocent patron is apprehended and then arrested by security, without adequate cause, the retailer should be held accountable and compensation paid to the victim.  An Orange County false arrest attorney with experience at handling such cases can make a fair assessment of these claims.  Mr. Ralph has more than 20 years of experience handling personal injury cases, including just this type.  He can be reached at 714-919-4415 for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Have you been a victim of an unlawful arrrest or detention by store security?

Nothing in this post is intended to suggest the Law Offices of Paul W. Ralph currently represents anyone involved in the news story above.  This posting should not be construed as legal advice or an opinion on the merit of any particular matter.  A consultation is the best way to obtain an assessment of your potential case.