News & Analysis as of

Car Accident Vicarious Liability

Rodemer Kane Attorneys at Law

Work-Related Car Accidents: Who Is Responsible?

When it comes to workplace-related incidents, the question of liability can often be complex and nuanced. One common scenario involves damage to an employee's car while parked in the employer's parking lot. This article...more

Marshall Dennehey

Court Dismissed Several Counts Against Transportation “Broker” on Basis of Vicarious Liability, but Held that Issue of Negligent...

Marshall Dennehey on

Allen v. Foxway Transportation, Inc., 2024 WL 0478015, No. 4:21-cv-00156 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 7, 2023) - In a tragic, fatal collision between a tractor trailer and a passenger vehicle, which was disabled after striking a deer, the...more

Maison Law

California Uber Accidents and Personal Injury Claims

Maison Law on

Uber is a California-born taxi service that relies upon apps on tablets, smartphones, and computers. Requests for service come with a few finger taps rather than hailing for cabs or competing with other taxi riders for...more

Ward and Smith, P.A.

What to Do if Injured by a Driver Who Is Under the Influence

Ward and Smith, P.A. on

In an instant and without warning, a driver under the influence can cause a serious, and oftentimes fatal, car accident. This wreck may change your life, or a loved one's life, forever....more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

Should an Employer be Held Vicariously Liable for a Motor Vehicle Accident Its Employee Caused on Her Way Home After Working the...

A California Court of Appeals affirmed an employer’s Motion for Summary Judgment on that question, finding that the employer was not vicariously liable in a recent opinion. The case involves Clanisha Villegas, who worked for...more

Dechert LLP

Legislation and Case Law in France / Second Half-Year 2019

Dechert LLP on

Prevention of occupational hazards and management of matters related to safety and the protection of health at work are major concerns for all those involved in labor law. This newsletter reviews five notable court...more

Payne & Fears

Victory for Policyholders - An Insurer's Breach of the Duty to Defend Opens Up Policy Limits

Payne & Fears on

Insurance companies can no longer breach the duty to defend believing that, as long as they act in good faith, their potential liability is capped at policy limits or any costs incurred by the insured in mounting a defense....more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

When Is An Employer Responsible For Accidents On Employees’ Commutes? - California Court Of Appeal Reverses $14 million Judgment...

An employer is liable for an accident on an employee’s commute to and from work only if the vehicle was required for work on the day of the employee’s accident, a California appellate court has ruled. ...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

County of Los Angeles not Vicariously Liable for its Employee’s Negligence Under the Required Vehicle Exception to the Going and...

The Case and Factors Considered - In Newland v. County of Los Angeles (2018) 2018 WL 3017203, ____ Cal.Rptr. ____ (appeal from a judgment and order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County), a deputy public defender was...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

California Court Declines to Accept Broad Exception To Going & Coming Rule

In Morales-Simental v. Genentech, Inc. (A145865, filed 9/22/17, publication order 10/19/17), the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District rejected the plaintiffs’ broad interpretation of the “special errand”...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Employment Law Notes - May 2017

Ruth Featherstone alleged that her former employer (SCPMG) discriminated against her based on a "temporary disability" that was caused by an adverse drug reaction, which resulted in an "altered mental state." During this...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

“Business Errand” Exception to the “Going and Coming Rule” Generally Presents Question of Fact Making Summary Judgment Rare

In Sumrall v. Modern Alloys, Inc., 2017 WL 1365089 (April 13, 2017), the Fourth Appellate District was presented with another circumstance where the “business errand” exception to the going and coming rule was at issue....more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

“Going and Coming Rule”: Employer Not Liable For Accident Caused By Employee On Commute Home Where Employee Had Option To Take Bus...

In Gail M. Lynn, et al. v. Tatitlek Support Services, Inc., et al., 2017 WL 696008, published February 24, 2017, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, affirmed the trial court’s granting of summary judgment in...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

California Employer Held Liable For Employee’s Accident During Commute

Moradi v. Marsh USA, No. B239858 (September 17, 2013): A California Court of Appeal recently held that an employer was vicariously liable for a car accident that occurred when an employee was driving home from work. ...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Court Limits “Coming And Going” Exception In Finding Employer Liable For Car Accident That Occurred While Employee Was...

Employers sometimes face vicarious liability for personal injury and property damage when employees use their own vehicles in connection with the performance of their job duties and get into traffic accidents. When facing...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Employer Was Released From Liability In Settlement Agreement Between Employee And Third Party

Heriberto Ceja Rodriguez sued Takeshi Oto for injuries he sustained in an automobile accident. Unbeknownst to Rodriguez, at the time of the accident, Oto was driving from an event related to his employment. (Oto was driving a...more

16 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide