Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLPAbramson Smith & Waldsmith LLP 2026-06-09T18:26:36Zhttps://www.aswllp.com/feed/atom/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/sites/1405059/2023/01/cropped-ASW-site-icon-32x32.jpgOn Behalf of Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[Can a California nursing home suddenly evict my elderly family member?]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492792026-05-18T08:21:48Z2026-05-18T08:21:48ZImagine this: you leave your loved one in the care of a California nursing home. Out of the blue, the administration tells you that your loved one must leave. A sudden eviction notice like this can cause anyone to panic. However, knowing your loved one’s rights as a nursing home resident can help you handle this situation gracefully.
A resident should receive a formal written notice 30 days before the planned eviction. The notice should mention the reason for discharge, location of the new facility and the resident’s appeal rights.
Residents have the right to challenge the notice if there are discrepancies in it.
Residents can dispute the unsafe discharge plans.
Residents have the right to contact the local ombudsman program.
A resident can stay put in the nursing home until the administrative law judge makes a final decision.
An eviction notice is not an “order,” and if someone asks you to leave, you can reiterate the above-listed rights.
Are there exceptions to the 30-day notice?
Nursing homes can bypass the 30-day notice period under certain circumstances. If the resident requires urgent medical support or when the resident is proving harmful to themselves or those around them. Similarly, if the resident’s health has improved sufficiently or they have stayed in the nursing home for less than 30 days, the notice period can be shortened. Nevertheless, one still has the right to appeal such shortened notice period and refuse eviction until the court’s order.
What should you do as soon as you receive the notice?
As discussed, the first thing you have to do is appeal the eviction notice. You can do that by contacting the California Department of Health Care Services. Generally, it is a good idea to enlist the help of an attorney experienced in fighting against elder abuse. ]]>On Behalf of Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[San Francisco parking lot crime: Are owners liable?]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492802026-05-05T12:46:34Z2026-05-05T12:46:34ZEstablishing the duty to provide security
Owners must act to protect visitors from crimes that they can predict. This foreseeability often depends on whether similar crimes happened on the property or nearby. If a garage has a history of break-ins, the attorney may argue the owner should have added safety measures.
Courts look at several factors to see if an owner met their legal duties:
Lighting quality: Bright lights in stairs and stalls to stop crime
Access control: Working gates and secure doors for visitors
Surveillance systems: Clear, working cameras in risky areas
Physical presence: Security guards or patrols during busy hours
These steps help determine whether a lot was safe for the public.
Proving a connection between negligence and injury
Liability starts when a security failure helps a criminal. For example, a broken gate or a dark corner gives an attacker a chance to hide. According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, many violent crimes happen in parking areas.
Evidence such as police reports, maintenance logs and old complaints prove that an owner ignored warning signs. This paper trail shows the injury was not just bad luck. Instead, it was an event the owner could have stopped with better care.
How local safety standards impact recovery
San Francisco owners must meet a high standard of care due to the risks of city life. Recovery is about more than healing. It requires checking if a business chose to save money instead of saving lives.
The legal path for premises liability needs a close look at local rules and court history. An attorney can find which security flaws led to the crime and save vital evidence. Taking action is a major step toward getting help for long-term health.]]>On Behalf of Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[When apps promise speed, who pays for the accidents?]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492812026-04-22T15:19:07Z2026-04-22T15:19:07ZHow speed pressure can lead to accidents
Many app-based platforms compete by offering fast service and short delivery windows. Even when no one directly tells a driver to rush, the system itself may create pressure. That pressure may come from:
Ratings tied to delivery times
Priority access to future orders
Incentives for completing more trips
Customer complaints over delays
Reduced earnings when orders take longer
Delivery work also requires constant movement through busy streets. In dense places like San Francisco, drivers often share the road with cyclists, pedestrians, scooters and heavy traffic.
When income depends on speed, some drivers may resort to speeding, frequent glances at the app, sudden turns or driving while tired.
Who may be legally responsible
California law often places financial responsibility on the party whose negligence caused the crash. That may be the delivery driver, another motorist or multiple parties. Under California’s comparative fault rules, responsibility may be shared when more than one person contributed to the accident.
Insurance issues can also be complex. A personal auto policy may not fully apply during delivery work, while company coverage may depend on when the crash occurred and what the driver was doing at the time. Businesses may also face scrutiny over training, supervision or safety policies that encourage unsafe driving.
Looking past convenience
Fast delivery can be useful, but convenience does not cancel out responsibility. When speed becomes part of the sales pitch, the risks may shift onto drivers, pedestrians and everyone sharing the road. If you were injured in a crash involving a delivery driver rushing to meet a deadline, determining who is responsible and what insurance coverage applies may shape your path to recovery.
]]>On Behalf of Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[Can a surgical complication be malpractice or just a known risk?]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492822026-04-17T12:06:05Z2026-04-17T12:06:05ZHow do surgeons define “known risks”?
Surgeons see known risks as issues that can happen even with proper care. For example, spinal injuries after surgery may involve infection, fluid leaks or temporary nerve pain. Surgeons usually explain these risks when securing informed consent.
Understanding these outcomes ahead of time can help you set realistic expectations and separate known risks apart from unexpected ones.
When can a complication be considered medical malpractice?
Complications can occur even with proper care, but it may involve malpractice if the provider fails to meet the applicable California standard of care and that failure causes harm. Examples that may warrant investigation include wrong-site surgery, retained surgical items or failing to respond appropriately to warning signs of a developing complication.
The key issue is whether the injury resulted from negligence rather than an inherent surgical risk. Medical records are typically reviewed to assess whether the standard of care was met.
What legal remedies may be available?
If negligence caused the complication, you may file a medical malpractice claim to recover damages. This can include costs for medical bills, lost wages and pain or suffering.
Legal counsel can help determine whether a case meets the requirements for a lawsuit. Acting promptly is necessary to comply with California’s statute of limitations.
Protecting your well-being after surgery
Understanding the difference between a known surgical risk and potential malpractice is key to managing your care. By learning the typical risks of a procedure and knowing your legal options, you can respond effectively if complications arise.]]>On Behalf of Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[Defective toys and child injuries: Legal options in California]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492832026-04-01T18:04:07Z2026-04-01T18:04:07ZHow toys become unsafe
Not all product defects are easy to see. A toy may appear harmless yet still present serious risks during normal use. In California, unsafe products generally fall into three categories:
Design defects: The product fails to be as safe as an ordinary consumer would expect, or the built-in risks of the design are greater than its benefits.
Manufacturing defects: The product deviates from its intended design or from other seemingly identical units in the same product line.
Failure to warn: The manufacturer fails to properly warn of potential risks that were known or knowable at the time, and a stronger warning would have changed the behavior of a reasonable person
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) monitors product safety and issues recalls when it finds risks. In California, the presence of a CPSC recall may serve as evidence of a defect, though the lack of a recall does not necessarily mean a product is legally safe.
How California handles product liability
California follows a strict product liability rule that focuses on the product's condition rather than the manufacturer’s intent. Commercial entities are responsible for injuries caused by defective products used in a reasonably foreseeable manner.
This liability extends to distributors and retailers. Courts look at claims based on whether the product met ordinary consumer safety expectations or if its design risks outweighed its benefits.
What to preserve after an injury
If your child suffers an injury, saving information early can make a big difference in understanding what happened.
Keep the toy and its original packaging.
Document the condition of the product and the injury with photographs.
Keep all purchase records and receipts.
Review whether the product has been subject to a recall via the CPSC.
These steps help establish whether the product differs from expected safety standards.
Why these matter
When a product intended for children causes harm, the impact extends beyond the immediate injury. It raises broader concerns about safety, accountability and trust.
California law reflects a clear expectation: products introduced into the stream of commerce must be safe for their intended or reasonably foreseeable use.
When a product does not meet that standard, the law holds the appropriate parties responsible. Understanding this framework can provide a more grounded sense of your legal standing.]]>by Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[Uber’s “Protecting Automobile Accident Victims from Attorney Self-Dealing Act” Could Limit Compensation for Injury Victims]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492842026-03-17T06:01:11Z2026-03-17T06:01:11ZProtecting Automobile Accident Victims from Attorney Self-Dealing Act. Uber presents the measure as a consumer protection reform that would ensure accident victims keep at least seventy-five percent of their recovery.
Critics see it very differently. They argue the initiative would make it harder for injured people to obtain legal representation and medical care while reducing the accountability of large corporations when their conduct causes harm.
If enacted, the proposal would significantly change how injury cases are brought and litigated in California.
Why Critics Say the Measure Does Not Actually Help Consumers
Uber promotes the initiative as a reform designed to ensure that accident victims keep more of their recovery. Critics argue that the proposal focuses on limiting attorney compensation rather than addressing the factors that most affect what injured people ultimately receive.
In serious injury cases, the largest reductions in a victim’s recovery often come from medical bills, insurance reimbursement claims, and disputes over the value of the injuries themselves. Opponents of the initiative contend that the proposal does little to address those issues. Instead, they argue the measure targets the legal framework surrounding injury cases while leaving the underlying challenges faced by accident victims largely unchanged.
How Serious Injury Cases Are Actually Litigated
Serious accident cases are rarely simple. Establishing liability and proving the full extent of a victim’s injuries often requires extensive investigation, expert testimony, and significant financial investment.
Attorneys handling these cases frequently advance the costs necessary to pursue the claim. That may include medical experts, accident reconstruction, depositions, and other litigation expenses. Most of these cases are handled on a contingency basis, meaning the attorney is paid only if the case succeeds.
That system allows injured people who cannot afford hourly legal fees to pursue claims against insurance companies or large corporate defendants. Critics of the initiative argue that changing the economics of these cases could make some complex claims harder to bring, particularly when substantial resources are required to prove fault or damages.
The Bottom Line for California Voters
Ballot initiatives sponsored by large corporations often come with polished messaging and promises of reform. Voters should look closely at who actually benefits from the legal changes being proposed.
When considering this measure, ask a simple question. Is Uber promoting this initiative to increase the compensation available to injured passengers, or to reduce how much Uber will have to pay when those passengers are seriously harmed?
Large corporations rarely spend millions of dollars promoting laws that increase their liability. More often, those efforts are aimed at reducing it.
California’s civil justice system exists for an important reason. It provides a way for people who have been harmed by negligence to seek accountability and recover the compensation necessary to rebuild their lives. Any proposal that alters those protections deserves careful scrutiny.
A Question for Voters
Consider what happens after a serious crash. Someone suffers life-changing injuries. Medical bills start to pile up. Income disappears. The person responsible for the harm has an insurance company and a team of lawyers working to minimize the claim.
The last thing an injured person should have to worry about is whether they can find a lawyer willing to take the case or obtain the medical care needed to prove their injuries.
Laws that make it harder for injured people to secure representation or treatment do not level the playing field. They tilt it further in favor of large corporations and insurance companies.
As this initiative moves forward, voters should look past the marketing and consider the real world impact on injured Californians and their families.
Why Access to the Civil Justice System Matters
For many injured Californians, the civil justice system is the only tool available to hold negligent actors accountable and obtain the financial support needed to recover from catastrophic injuries.
Medical treatment, rehabilitation, and lost income can create overwhelming financial pressure after a serious accident. Laws that make it harder for injured people to obtain legal representation do not simply affect lawsuits. They affect whether ordinary people have a meaningful opportunity to seek justice.
At Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP, we believe California laws should protect injured victims, not make it harder for them to hold wrongdoers accountable.]]>On Behalf of Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[What makes a product legally defective in California?]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492852026-03-13T15:53:46Z2026-03-13T15:53:46ZWhat qualifies as a defect under California law?
California law recognizes three main types of product defects: design defects, where a product’s design makes it unsafe even when built correctly; manufacturing defects, where a production error makes the product different from its intended design; and failure to warn, where a company does not provide proper warnings or instructions about known risks.
A product does not need a recall to qualify as defective. Courts examine whether the product posed an unreasonable danger when someone used it in a reasonable way.
Do you have to prove the company was careless?
In many cases, you do not. California applies strict liability to defective product claims. Under this standard, you do not have to prove negligence. You must instead show:
The product had a defect
You used the product as intended or in a foreseeable way
Responsibility does not stop with the manufacturer. Distributors and retailers who helped place the product into the market may also share liability. Courts look at each business involved in bringing the product to consumers.
Product defect cases often involve detailed technical review and expert input. Understanding how California defines a defective product gives you a clearer view of your potential legal options after a serious injury.]]>On Behalf of Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[Causation in premises liability: 4 hurdles for plaintiffs]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492862026-03-11T09:33:10Z2026-03-11T09:33:10ZNavigating the path to proof
It is essential to do more than show a dangerous condition existed at the scene. You must establish a direct link between that specific hazard and the physical harm you suffered. The common causation challenges that you may encounter include:
The "but-for" test: This rule requires you to prove the injury would not have happened if the owner had fixed the hazard. You must demonstrate that the dangerous condition was the actual reason for your mishap rather than mere coincidence.
The mystery of the fall: If you suffered a fall, the defense may argue that a claim is just a guess if no one saw the exact moment of the trip. It is vital to point to the object or slick surface that caused the event due to negligence.
Old injuries: An insurance company may claim that your pain comes from old health issues rather than the new accident. Doctors must explain how the property defect led to a new injury or made a past one much worse.
Many factors involved: Sometimes, several factors contribute to an accident, such as poor lighting and a broken step at the same time. You must show that the property owner’s failure played a major role in the chain of events that led to your injury.
Gathering evidence like photos or witness statements immediately after an incident can provide a strong foundation for your claim. In addition, expert witnesses like engineers can play a critical role in connecting the dots for the court.
Seeking a fair resolution
Safety standards aim to protect everyone in the community by ensuring that spaces remain secure. When dealing with a premises liability injury, building a claim can be daunting. With legal counsel, you may receive guidance for evaluating the strength of your claim and seeking a fair resolution.]]>On Behalf of Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[What are the common causes of car and motorcycle crashes?]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492872026-03-03T08:00:48Z2026-03-03T08:00:48ZCar and motorcycle accidents vary depending on the impact and severity of the damage or injuries. Most accidents happen because of daily driving errors that can place drivers like you at risk.
Both car drivers and motorcyclists need to understand that these accidents often involve contributing factors, so you can stay attentive and reduce the risks of accidents.
Common factors that lead to motorcycle and car accidents
In a 2023 report by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), there were 40,990 fatalities across the U.S. due to vehicle crashes, with California consistently ranking second among states for traffic fatalities, reflecting the dangers that families and commuters face on the state’s roads. These numbers highlight the following factors that contribute to car and motorcycle accidents:
Speed: Driving past the speed limit can lead to accidents as drivers or riders may miscalculate a vehicle's speed, which also increases the severity of the impact.
Lane changes and merging errors: A driver may change lanes and forget to check the side mirror, causing a direct impact to a rider or another car driver.
Visibility: Car drivers may often overlook motorcycles due to their smaller size, often leading to crashes.
Adverse weather conditions: Extreme rain, snow or fog can result in slippery roads and lower visibility, often leading to accidents.
Road hazards: Cracked road surfaces, potholes, debris or construction spots with barriers can pose risks to drivers, especially motorcyclists.
If you have experienced a car or motorcycle crash, these factors may influence how fault is evaluated after the police have cleared the accident scene.
Understanding crash causes matters
Vehicle crashes are unforeseeable circumstances. If you are involved in a car or motorcycle collision, it is essential to know that fault often depends on speed, visibility, driving errors or road conditions, rather than who suffered the most injuries. Knowing how the court will evaluate these factors within the legal framework of auto accidents can help you approach your situation with confidence as you decide on your next steps.]]>On Behalf of Abramson Smith Waldsmith LLP<![CDATA[How to document your medical malpractice claim from day one]]>https://www.aswllp.com/?p=492882026-02-24T10:41:56Z2026-02-24T10:41:56ZSecure your medical history
After you find out about your injury, secure copies of your medical records from the hospital you visited. Under California law, you have the right to request physical or electronic copies of your records. The provider must deliver these to you within 15 days of receiving your written request.
Create a personal journal
While medical documentation shows what your doctor did, a personal journal can exhibit what they cost you. Write about your daily pain levels, physical limitations and missed life events. For instance, if you have a lumbar spine injury, document how this condition significantly affected your life. Be as detailed as you can to demonstrate the losses caused by your injury.
Protect yourself from insurers and social media
In malpractice cases, you need to give a health care provider 90 days’ notice before filing a lawsuit. This often triggers contact with their insurance adjusters, who may reach out to you. Avoid answering their prying questions.
Additionally, refrain from posting about your health or malpractice case on social media. Happy photos and sentiments can be used against you to downplay your suffering.
Taking legal action with help
The path to justice is technical and strictly timed. To ensure your evidence meets the rigorous standards of California law, seeking legal guidance can provide you with the peace of mind you need.]]>