$10 Million Lawsuit Filed by This Law Firm Against Nightclub Owners Alleging Service to Obviously Intoxicated Minor who Claims Rape By an Owner

When is sex good? When does consensual sex cross the line to sexual battery? Can one consent to sex if she is too inebriated to understand the consequences of her actions and decisions? If the much older man caused the 19 year old young woman to become intoxicated for the express purpose of taking advantage of her sexually, then did so, is that sexual battery and/or rape since she did not have the ability to consent? And finally if the much older man owns and runs a nightclub business licensed by the state ABC, and if he commits those acts against an obviously intoxicated young woman under 21 years of age, has he violated Bus.& Prof. § 25602.1 (civil liability)?		Stephen Jamieson
A lawsuit we recently filed in Superior Court alleges these facts. As Stephen Jamieson points out: “It may seem like good common sense not to do these things but apparently good "sense" is not common to all ABC Licensees.”

Seven Essential Issues to Fire Claim Management

1. Know What Your Policy Provides: Read your policy thoroughly so you understand both your and the insurance companies obligations. Don’t trust the insurance company to accurately portray the provisions of the policy.

2. Document Your Loss Immediately And Thoroughly: As soon as possible, document loss with video and/or still pictures. Make a detailed list.

3. Take The Largest And All Advances Offered: The insurance company will probably never be more generous than in aftermath of fire, and you will probably need all you are given.

4. Request Compensation According To Policy Provisions: The same damage can be described in a variety of ways, some covered by the policy and some may not. Removal of a fallen tree might not be covered but debris removal may be so characterize it this way.

5. Get Everything In Writing: Spoken agreements with an adjuster are usually worth nothing.

6. Keep A Journal Of Your Claim:

7. Keep Out Of The Middle, Financially: Have as much as possible billed directly to the insurance company. Insurance companies are often slow in repaying and you may be stuck with the costs.

Dealing with Contractors

The Contractors State License Board (CSLB) reminds consumers of their rights and responsibilities when hiring building contractors. The CSLB has found that the most common complaints against contractors can be avoided when consumers:

• Do not pay excessive down payments to contractors
• Do not let payments on home improvement projects get ahead of the work
• Hire only licensed building contractors
• Get several bids from different contractors
• Check out the contractor's license status and history with the CSLB.

Elder Abuse Is a Serious Problem

Each year hundreds of thousands of older persons are abused, neglected and exploited by nursing homes, health care facilities, family members and others. Many of these elderly victims are people who are frail, vulnerable, cannot help themselves and depend on others to meet their most basic needs.

A National Elder Abuse Incidence Study conducted in 1996 found the following:

• 551,011 persons, aged 60 and over, experienced abuse, neglect, and/or self-neglect in a one-year period;
• Almost four times as many new incidents of abuse, neglect, and/or self-neglect were not reported as those that were reported to and substantiated by adult protective services agencies;
• Persons, aged 80 years and older, suffered abuse and neglect two to three times their proportion of the older population;
• Female elders are abused at a higher rate than males, after accounting for their larger proportion in the aging population.
  

Type of Elder Abuse

There are several types of Elder Abuse. The most prevalent types include the following:

1. Physical abuse

2. Sexual abuse

3. Psychological abuse

4. Neglect

5. Abandonment

6. Financial or Fiduciary Abuse

Signs of Elder Abuse

It is important to be aware of the signs that indicate that Elder Abuse may be occurring. Signs of the first five (5) types of Elder Abuse listed above include the following:

• Open wounds, cuts, bruises or welts
• Elder is emotionally upset or agitated
• Dehydration, malnutrition
• Caretaker can not adequately explain condition
• Extremely withdrawn & non-communicative
• Elder's sudden change in behavior
• Unclean conditions
• Loss of weight
• Burns caused by cigarettes, caustics, acids
• Missing undergarments
• Fecal or urine odor

Signs of Financial or Fiduciary Elder Abuse include the following:

• unexplained disappearance of funds or valuables
• changes in bank accounts, including additional names on an elder's signature card
• significant sudden changes in ownership of elders’ real property
• significant sudden changes in a will or other financial documents
• appearance and claims of previously uninvolved relatives
• unexplained transfers of assets to a family member or others

After reviewing these lists, do you believe that you or any loved ones may be a victim of elder abuse by a care provider or others?

How to Choose a Nursing Home and Prevent Elder Abuse in Nursing Homes

Given the statistics that more than 30% of the country’s nursing homes have been cited for nursing home abuse causing “actual harm to residents or put them in immediate jeopardy”, it is becoming increasingly important to make sure the nursing home facility chosen meets certain guidelines and regulations.

Good points to ask/observe at nursing homes to prevent nursing home abuse include:

• If the nursing home is certified by Medicare and Medicaid then these facilities are required by law to let you see the surveys conducted by the agencies that regulate them.
• Reviewing the latest state inspection report, noting the date it was made.
• If other nursing home residents show signs of visible elder abuse, such as bruises etc.
• If nursing home residents receive immediate attention.
• If nursing home residents receive privacy.
• Talk to other nursing home residents and observe their reactions and answers closely.
• Observe the cleanliness of the nursing home facility, not just on surface appearances which can be deceiving.
• Visit the nursing home facility at different times to observe different staff and if the treatment of nursing home residents remain consistent.
• Visit nursing home facilities unannounced so nursing home staff is unable to prepare their reactions.
• Eat a meal at the cafeteria to sample the food.
• Observe if any social or recreational activities are planned and how they are conducted.
• Observe if the residents appear to enjoy being with the nursing home staff.
• If the nursing home staff knows the nursing home residents by name.
• Even after picking a nursing home facility continue to observe in the future.

Compare nursing home facilities and try to include the potential nursing home resident in the selection if possible. By taking your time during the nursing home search it can better prevent more instances of nursing home abuse from occurring.

There is a wealth of information in print and online to aid in the selection and comparison of nursing homes and alternatives thereto. A good starting point for California seniors and those caring for them is the California Nursing Home Search website [http://www.calnhs.org/]. This site is a free service for California seniors, caregivers, family members, providers and consumers. It provides comprehensive information about the quality of nursing and intermediate care facilities in the state. You can obtain information specific to any licensed facility in California including results from the most recent on site inspections from state monitoring agencies. This includes, complaints, quality indicators, staffing and the like. Also provided is advice on how to select a nursing or comprehensive care facility, a list of questions to ask and a list of resident and family rights under the law.

Protections Under Law

Elders are recognized as particularly vulnerable segment of society deserving of special protections under the law. Legislatures in all fifty (50) states have passed some form of elder abuse prevention laws. Laws and definitions of terms vary considerably from one state to another, but all states have set up reporting systems. Generally, adult protective services (APS) agencies receive and investigate reports of suspected elder abuse.

The California Legislature has recognized that elders and dependent adults may be subjected to abuse, neglect, or abandonment and that this state has a responsibility to protect these persons by passing the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (EADACPA). [See Welfare & Institutions Code, Section 15600 et seq.] This body of law provides heightened duties to those interacting with seniors and provides specific remedies to seniors subjected to abuse.

The law also provides legal recourse for any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice and any unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising. [See Business & Professions Code, Section 17200 et seq.]

In short, there are significant protections under the law for elder abuse. Civil lawsuits may be filed and can include causes of action under the above mentioned provisions of law. Through these lawsuits, victims of elder abuse may receive large monetary recoveries for what they have endured. In the case where an elder dies from the abuse, the cause of action upon which a lawsuit can be based for their emotional distress survive their death and may be brought by certain family members. The law, however, limits the time in which such lawsuits may be brought – so protect your rights.

Largest Verdict for Fraud Ever Rendered for Deception Related to E-Z-GO Golf Cars. FraudJudgement for 1.67 Million Dollars Entered Against TEXTRON Inc

Stephen Jamieson, a partner in the law firm Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson based in Los Angeles, California, in association with Tom Ward of the Lancaster based law firm Michelizzi, Schwabacher, Ward & Collins, obtained a Judgment for Fraud against E-Z-Go division of Textron, Inc. also known as TEXTRON INC this month. TEXTRON INC., a multinational defense contractor that is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol TXT is ranked 190th on the Forbes 500. Ryan Kroll, an associate at Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson assisted Mr. Jamieson.

After a six week trial, a twelve person jury decided a verdict in favor of Ridgetop Ranch Properties, Inc. dba Lake Elizabeth Golf Course (LEGC) on claims of Breach of Express Warranty, Breach of the Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose, Fraud by Intentional Misrepresentation and Fraud by Concealment.

"The jury was clearly convinced by the evidence produced at trial that TEXTRON (E-Z-GO Golf Cart Division) committed Fraud," explains Stephen Jamieson. "E-Z-GO tried to hide behind limitations in its printed warranty but was not allowed to do so."

According to the lawsuit: the 80 E-Z-GO TXT golf cars broke down, failed, or were inoperable on a weekly basis, rendering numerous golf cars unfit for use; that while E-Z-GO was stating to LEGC that the golf cars were not defective for use at the Course, E-Z-GO was nevertheless at the same time seeking reimbursement and credit from the speed controller manufacturer, Curtis Instruments Inc., claiming the speed controllers used on the TXT golf cars were defective and/or unfit for use; and, that E-Z-GO concealed these and other facts from LEGC and went on to replace the failed speed controllers with similarly defective controllers.

Due to the continual breakdowns of the E-Z-GO golf cars, LEGC gained a reputation at that time as a course that was unreliable and dangerous, thereby suffering a tremendous decrease in the number of golf rounds played which caused a decrease in profitability and a diminution of value of the Course. The jury determined damages caused by E-Z-GO Division of Textron Inc., also known as TEXTRON, INC., to be $1,670,932.00, plus Costs, and 10% Post Judgment Interest.

The Complaint and Judgment are at: www.ssjlaw.com

Racketeering Case For Gambling Casino Judgment rendered for over $2,200,000

A client who wanted to purchase operation rights to a popular southland Casino, renowned for its gambling and entertainment offerings, lost hundreds of thousands of dollars of "blood money" as those rights were sold multiple times in alleged back room deals.

These deals were alleged to be between the Casino operator and certain members of the local City Council and Redevelopment Agency.

Stephen Allen Jamieson, and his partners Stephen Warren Solomon, Ralph B. Saltsman and R. Bruce Evans, alleged in the lawsuit that the client had been extorted, defrauded and was made the victim of a conspiracy between several individuals in and out of public office to commit illegal acts.

They based this allegation on their findings through massive efforts in discovery (written requests for information in the lawsuit, called interrogatories, request to produce documents, requests for admissions, and depositions [testimony obtained from witnesses under oath outside of court]) and investigation through the firm's private investigators.

Jamieson and his partners successfully litigated this case under the Racketeering Influence and Corrupt Organization (RICO) federal statutes in Los Angeles Superior Court, a Trial Court, for several years. During the course of litigation, the case went several times from the Trial Court to the Court of Appeal and back to the Trial Court.

Through the perseverance and innovative legal work by Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson we reached a valuable settlement in favor of our client shortly before the jury trial was scheduled to begin, as against some of the Defendants; and resulted in a Judgment against the remaining Defendants for over $2,200,000.

Teenager Injured in Football Game Receives Jury Award of $7.57 Million for Missed Diagnosis by Treating Doctors

Previous settlement with other defendants garnered additional 1.8 million dollars.

Stephen Allen Jamieson won a jury trial in the amount of $7.57 million dollars on behalf of a 19-year-old who had received a medical treatment far below the standard of care including a misdiagnosis of a bleed on his brain. This case was tried in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Southwest District (Torrance) before the Honorable Lois Smaltz.

In September 1995, the then 16-year-old plaintiff was practicing with his high school football team when he sustained several hard hits to the head from another player. In the evening his parents took him to the Urgent Care Center. The doctor failed to properly diagnose the problem as a concussion. There were no radiographic films done, no CT scan done. The doctor misdiagnosed the problem as dehydration and failed to place any definite limitation of the plaintiff's participation in football over the next few days.

Two days later, the teenager collapsed on the playing field within a few minutes of the start of the football game. He was later diagnosed with a massive brain hemorrhage and was comatose for a month. He was left with brain damage resulting in loss of function in one arm and one leg and cognitive deficiencies.

Solomon, Saltsman and Jamieson filed a lawsuit for negligence against the school district as well as the doctor, the Urgent Care Center for which he worked, and the hospital that sponsored the Urgent Care Center.

The defendants in this action vigorously litigated this matter. There were over thirty depositions taken. Expert witnesses were required in many different fields such as athletic training, accident reconstruction, biomechanics, engineering and sports of psychology. The malpractice issue required the hiring of medical experts such as a neuropsychiatrists and psychologists. After more than two years, Mr. Jamieson and Stephen W. Solomon settled with the school district for $1,800,000.

Four months later Stephen Jamieson took the case against the urgent care doctor and his employers to trial before a superior court in Torrance, California. The medical issues were perceived by the defense to be the weaker portion of the case, particularly considering that Torrance is a relatively conservative jurisdiction, and that there are inherent difficulties associated with a medical malpractice action (i.e., MICRA limitations).

Therefore, the defense offered only $50,000 prior to trial. After three weeks in trial, Mr. Jamieson convinced the jury to return a verdict in the amount of $7,570,000.

Solomon Saltsman & Jamieson Win Major Victory before California Supreme Court

In a sweeping opinion in cases brought by Ralph B. Saltsman and Stephen Warren Solomon of Solomon Saltsman & Jamieson, the California Supreme Court unanimously struck down the practice of attorneys in administrative agency hearings submitting ex parte communications to decision-makers within their agency. The Supreme Court held such communication violated specific prohibitions stated in the Administrative Procedure Act, the statutory manifestation of Due Process of Law.

The Court’s ruling vindicated the rights of all ABC licensees in California and will change how all administrative agencies in California do business, and not just the ABC. There will no longer be secret communications from agency attorney to departmental decision-maker in any adversarial hearing. While the decision was issued in cases prosecuted by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, the decision will impact governmental agencies across the state, including other state agencies as well as municipal and county governments.

The Court followed Saltsman’s argument before the court and held: “[A] prosecutor cannot communicate off the record with the agency decision maker or the decision maker’s advisors about the substance of the case. But the one contact that is forbidden is the one contact that occurred here.”

In the cases before the Court, Administrative Law Judges after hearing in written proposed decisions, dismissed disciplinary proceedings brought against ABC licensees. Those proposed decisions were rejected, and the Department imposed suspensions nevertheless. In each instance written ex parte documents were submitted following the hearing by the prosecutor to the Department’s Chief Counsel who acted as decision-maker. The lawfim argued and the Court determined that this and any secret communication from prosecutor to decision-maker was unlawful and unconstitutional.

To review the decision go to:
www.//ssjlaw.com/articles/Quintanar_Supreme_Court_Decision.pdf