mcnicholaslaw

[mcnicholaslaw]

McNicholas & McNicholas’ Case Listed on TopVerdict.com’s Top 100 Verdicts in California for 2018

Partner Matthew McNicholas and Senior Lawyer Doug Winter’s $2.75 million, unanimous verdict on behalf of a Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) employee was ranked among TopVerdict.com’s Top 100 Verdicts in California for 2018.

In Meiche v. City of Los Angeles, the plaintiff, who is a member of the LAFD Dive Safety Board, witnessed the destruction of equipment purchased by the Dive Safety Board, misappropriation of grant funds, and improper disposal of equipment in violation of grant restrictions, and was retaliated against for disclosing potential grant fraud and abuse.

TopVerdict.com recognizes U.S. law firms and attorneys who have obtained one of the highest jury verdicts, court awards or settlements in the nation or an individual state, in a particular area of law and year.

The post McNicholas & McNicholas’ Case Listed on TopVerdict.com’s Top 100 Verdicts in California for 2018 appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Common Accidents that Occur on Construction Sites

Construction is a dangerous industry. Workers often handle heavy materials, sharp objects, and powerful tools and work under tight deadlines. This combination creates an extremely dangerous environment.

How OSHA Regulates Construction Sites

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the regulatory body responsible for ensuring safe workplace standards, reports that 20% of workplace accidents or fatalities occur in the construction field.

Although OSHA creates and enforces safety guidelines and inspections, construction accidents unfortunately still occur in the workplace. Some of these common construction accidents are even fatal.

Common construction accidents include:

1. Construction Site Falls

According to OSHA, 39.2% of construction accident deaths occur due to falling. This is often caused by improperly maintained or installed catwalks and scaffolding, despite OSHA guidelines. Safety materials, such as harnesses and other forms of fall protection, are required but often overlooked.

2. Struck by an Object

Roughly 8.2% of workplace accidents on construction sites were due to a falling object. Even seemingly mundane tasks can be extremely hazardous, so proper safety equipment must always be used. Employees who work in an otherwise safe situation can be struck by a falling object if not outfitted with proper safety equipment.

3. Caught Inside or In Between

This broad category accounts for 5.1% of construction workplace accidents. With enormous vehicles and a lack of communication, serious injuries can happen at any moment. Heavy tools, if used improperly or without the right safety gear, can quickly lead to horrifying injuries. Structures may collapse without proper attention to detail, harming you or others in the process.

Contact a Construction Accident Attorney

If you were injured in a construction accident, you may be able to seek reimbursement for your injuries with the help of a construction accident attorney.

Your employer is responsible for your safety, especially when working in a dangerous field like construction. Sometimes, workers’ compensation is not enough to cover your medical bills, loss of income and suffering. You need a construction accident attorney to get you on the path of recovery. Call the construction accident attorneys of McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP at 310-474-1582 to discuss your situation.

Source: https://www.osha.gov/oshstats/commonstats.html

The post Common Accidents that Occur on Construction Sites appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Common Accidents that Occur on Construction Sites

Construction is a dangerous industry. Workers often handle heavy materials, sharp objects, and powerful tools and work under tight deadlines. This combination creates an extremely dangerous environment.

How OSHA Regulates Construction Sites

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the regulatory body responsible for ensuring safe workplace standards, reports that 20% of workplace accidents or fatalities occur in the construction field.

Although OSHA creates and enforces safety guidelines and inspections, construction accidents unfortunately still occur in the workplace. Some of these common construction accidents are even fatal.

Common construction accidents include:

Construction Site Falls

According to OSHA, 39.2% of construction accident deaths occur due to falling. This is often caused by improperly maintained or installed catwalks and scaffolding, despite OSHA guidelines. Safety materials, such as harnesses and other forms of fall protection, are required but often overlooked.

Struck by an Object

Roughly 8.2% of workplace accidents on construction sites were due to a falling object. Even seemingly mundane tasks can be extremely hazardous, so proper safety equipment must always be used. Employees who work in an otherwise safe situation can be struck by a falling object if not outfitted with proper safety equipment.

Caught Inside or In Between

This broad category accounts for 5.1% of construction workplace accidents. With enormous vehicles and a lack of communication, serious injuries can happen at any moment. Heavy tools, if used improperly or without the right safety gear, can quickly lead to horrifying injuries. Structures may collapse without proper attention to detail, harming you or others in the process.

Contact a Construction Accident Attorney

If you were injured in a construction accident, you may be able to seek reimbursement for your injuries with the help of a construction accident attorney.

Your employer is responsible for your safety, especially when working in a dangerous field like construction. Sometimes, workers’ compensation is not enough to cover your medical bills, loss of income and suffering. You need a construction accident attorney to get you on the path of recovery. Call the construction accident attorneys of McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP at 310-474-1582 to discuss your situation.

 Source: https://www.osha.gov/oshstats/commonstats.html

The post Common Accidents that Occur on Construction Sites appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Understanding California’s Strict Product Liability Laws

As a customer purchasing a product, you place your trust in the manufacturer. You believe the product will satisfy your needs and not cause you harm.

California’s strict consumer protection laws seek to ensure that manufacturers, retailers, and designers are held accountable for any injury their products might cause to the public. However, these laws are bound by a statute of limitations that determines how long your claim remains valid in the eyes of the court. It’s helpful to think of a statute of limitations as a clock counting down how much time you have to pursue legal action.

What Is the Difference Between Product Liability and Negligence?

Negligence claims must prove that the injuries or damages were caused by careless acts or breached the required duties owed to others. Strict liability makes no judgment based on good-faith intentions or no-fault responsibility; it pertains only to the fact that an injury or damage occurred.

Fault can lie with the manufacturer, designer, retailer, wholesaler, or others. Product liability laws seek to protect consumers from dangers, defects, or malfunctions that cause physical pain and suffering.

In California, a product liability attorney seeks to prove that their client’s injury was a direct result of how the product was manufactured or designed, or the result of improper warnings.

How to Determine if You Have Been Injured by a Defective Product

If you believe you were injured by a defective product, here are three questions to consider:

1. Was the product designed with a flaw?

A design flaw isn’t the result of a single mistake, but refers to the design itself being dangerous. In the case of a design flaw, every single product would feature the same flaw. An example would be a child’s toy with small detachable parts that could be a choking hazard.

2. Was the product manufactured with an error?

A manufacturer defect is unplanned and happens during the manufacturing process. This is where the product manufactured fails to meet the design.

3. Did the product feature poor instructions or was it missing warning labels?

A company must also protect the consumer with adequate warning labels and proper instructions. The proper way to use a product may not be obvious to the user. An example would be failing to warn of dangers the manufacturer knows occur frequently with use (proper or improper).

How to Prove a Strict Product Liability Case

Although you are not required to show evidence of negligence with a strict product liability lawsuit, an attorney must prove that the defect was in the manufacturing, design, or warnings.

California’s Statute of Limitations for Product Liability Lawsuits

California requires all product liability lawsuits be filed within two years of the injury; however, this small window of time may change depending on the situation. While most injuries may be obvious, others may not be readily apparent.

Los Angeles Product Liability Attorneys

Unfortunately, faulty products still cause a large number of personal injuries. With a strict statute of limitations in place, it’s crucial to bring forward claims as soon as possible.

The product liability attorneys at McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP hold manufacturers, retailers, and other parties accountable for their harm to innocent consumers. Contact us today at 310.474.1582 if you have been injured by a product.

The post Understanding California’s Strict Product Liability Laws appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

McNicholas & McNicholas Obtains $1M Policy Limit for Driver Injured in Semi-Truck Accident

Senior Lawyer Juan Victoria obtained a $1M policy limit on behalf of a driver who was rear-ended by an 18-wheel semi-trailer truck while sitting in traffic. The force of the collision caused the plaintiff’s seat to collapse, which launched her into the back seat of her car, causing a severe lumbar back injury and a traumatic brain injury.

The post McNicholas & McNicholas Obtains $1M Policy Limit for Driver Injured in Semi-Truck Accident appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

$1.5 Million Settlement Obtained for a Driver and Passenger Rear-Ended in a Four-Car Pile Up

Partner Matthew McNicholas and Senior Lawyer Juan Victoria obtained a $1.5 million settlement on behalf of a driver and passenger who were rear-ended by a Newflyer GETD bus during a four-car collision. Both plaintiffs sustained injuries to the head, upper and lower back, and neck.

The post $1.5 Million Settlement Obtained for a Driver and Passenger Rear-Ended in a Four-Car Pile Up appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Associate Justin Eballar Featured on Pepperdine Law School’s TV Show for His Pro Bono Work on Behalf of Woolsey Fire Victims

Pepperdine Law School launched a temporary disaster relief clinic to assist the hundreds of Woolsey Fire victims who lost their homes and belongings in the devastating 2018 wildfire. In a segment on Pepperdine Law School’s TV show, Pepperdine News Waves, alumnus and Associate Justin Eballar discussed his pro bono work to aid victims in coping with their losses and rebuilding their lives, with Pepperdine Law student, Rachel Ripp.

“Being able to give back to the school and the surrounding community has been really rewarding,” said Eballar who worked with 13 victims through Pepperdine Law School’s disaster relief program.

Eballar, along with local student volunteers, professors, law firms and neighborhood legal services in LA county, provided legal services and advice to more than 100 victims on applications and appeals, contract issues, insurance matters, housing concerns and more.

Watch the full story.

The post Associate Justin Eballar Featured on Pepperdine Law School’s TV Show for His Pro Bono Work on Behalf of Woolsey Fire Victims appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

The Recorder, Yahoo Finance, San Francisco Chronicle and More Report on McNicholas & McNicholas’ Win against Tillys for Illegal On-Call Scheduling Practices

In a 2-1 decision against retail clothing store Tillys, the Second District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles ruled that “on-call” employees are entitled to “reporting time pay” as soon as they are required to report for work. The Recorder, Yahoo Finance, Law360, San Francisco Chronicle and SF Gate turned to Partner Patrick McNicholas and Associate Michael Kent to discuss their recent win and its impact.

“The ruling is ‘a great victory for employees,’” commented McNicholas.

Kent noted that this ruling “gives employees more flexibility in their scheduling.”

Tillys, like many other companies using “on call” scheduling, require employees to be available before the start of a possible work shift — phoning their employer two hours before the shift to learn whether they’re needed — but have been denied pay for that two-hour period.

McNicholas and Kent represented a sales clerk in her lawsuit against Tillys for being denied pay for time spent on call. In its February 4, 2019 decision, the appeals court ruled that on-call employees are protected by a 1943 California Industrial Welfare Commission wage order, still in effect, that entitles employees to “reporting time pay” as soon as they are required to report for work, including reporting in to an employer over the phone, regardless of whether they’re called in to work.

The case has been remanded back to a lower court for further proceedings.

Read the Law360 article. (Subscription required)

Read The Recorder article.

Read the Yahoo Finance article.

Read the San Francisco Chronicle article.

Read the SF Gate article.

The post The Recorder, Yahoo Finance, San Francisco Chronicle and More Report on McNicholas & McNicholas’ Win against Tillys for Illegal On-Call Scheduling Practices appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Rebuilding Your Home After the California Wildfires [Infographic]

If you or a loved one lost your home in a recent California wildfire, you may find that the payout from your homeowner’s insurance is not enough to rebuild your home. It’s crucial that you understand your options for recovery.

The post Rebuilding Your Home After the California Wildfires [Infographic] appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

McNicholas & McNicholas Obtains $1 Million Settlement for Driver Injured in Semi-Truck Accident

Partner Matthew McNicholas and Senior Lawyer Juan Victoria obtained a $1 million policy limit settlement on behalf of a semi-truck driver who was rear-ended by another semi-truck while he was dropping off cargo at the Port of Los Angeles, and sustained a neck and back injury.

The post McNicholas & McNicholas Obtains $1 Million Settlement for Driver Injured in Semi-Truck Accident appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

BuzzFeed, The Wall Street Journal, The National Law Journal, Forbes, Associated Press and More Report on McNicholas & McNicholas’ Lawsuits Against PG&E

In the BuzzFeed article “The Nation’s Biggest Utility Has Filed For Bankruptcy After Devastating California Wildfires,” Partner Patrick McNicholas discussed the impact PG&E’s bankruptcy filing will have on pending litigation brought by victims of the 2018 Paradise fire.

“Given the scope of the recent fires, bankruptcy wasn’t unexpected,” said McNicholas. However, he noted that victims should remain confident they’ll be compensated for their losses, and that this could be a turning point for how utilities operate.

“The aviation industry has a culture of safety, which has paid off huge,” he said. “The same thing needs to occur with utilities. For the last three decades, they’ve failed to invest in safety, in upgrading the integrity of their systems.”

The firm’s lawsuits against PG&E, filed along with Frantz Law Group and Bridgford, Gleason & Artinian, were also featured in The Wall Street Journal, The National Law Journal, Forbes, Associated Press, Daily Journal and The Houston Chronicle.

Read the BuzzFeed article.

Read The Wall Street Journal article.

Read The National Law Journal article.

Read the Forbes article.

Read the Associated Press article.

Read the Daily Journal article.

Read The Houston Chronicle article.

The post BuzzFeed, The Wall Street Journal, The National Law Journal, Forbes, Associated Press and More Report on McNicholas & McNicholas’ Lawsuits Against PG&E appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Partner Matthew McNicholas Presents CLE at Wagner Legal Group on Recent Multimillion-Dollar Verdicts and Lessons Learned

Partner Matthew McNicholas will present at Wagner Legal Group’s January CLE event on January 31st to discuss his recent multimillion-dollar employment verdict against the LAFD, and employment cases in general. The CLE event will be hosted at Wagner Legal Group’s office from 6:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. To RSVP for this event, click HERE.

Wagner Legal Group is a Los Angeles based law firm focusing on employment and business litigation, personal injury, transactional matters and general business consulting.

The post Partner Matthew McNicholas Presents CLE at Wagner Legal Group on Recent Multimillion-Dollar Verdicts and Lessons Learned appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Four McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP Attorneys Selected as 2019 Southern California Super Lawyers

Partners John McNicholas, Matthew McNicholas and Patrick McNicholas, and Senior Lawyer Juan Victoria were selected as 2019 Southern California Super Lawyers for their work in employment and labor, personal injury and business litigation.

Patrick has been included on the list since 2004, and John and Matt have been named Super Lawyers since 2005. This is Juan’s fourth year on the list.

Super Lawyers is a rating service that recognizes outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas. Using a multiphase selection process, peer nominations and evaluations, and independent research, Super Lawyers identifies attorneys for their professional achievement and peer recognition.

The post Four McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP Attorneys Selected as 2019 Southern California Super Lawyers appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Two McNicholas & McNicholas Workplace Retaliation Cases Ranked Among TopVerdict.com’s Top 20 Civil Rights Settlements in California in 2017

Two of Partner Matthew McNicholas’ settlements were ranked among TopVerdict.com’s Top 20 Civil Rights Settlements in California in 2017. In Jackman v. City of Los Angeles, Matt secured a $900,000 settlement on behalf of an LAPD officer who was harassed and discriminated against in response to a request for medical leave. Matt also secured a $900,000 settlement in Morrison v. City of Los Angeles on behalf of an LAPD officer who experienced gender and sexual-based harassment, discrimination and retaliation for reporting inappropriate and unlawful practices within the LAPD.

TopVerdict.com recognizes law firms and attorneys who obtain the highest jury verdicts, settlements, court or arbitration awards in the U.S. or a particular state.

The post Two McNicholas & McNicholas Workplace Retaliation Cases Ranked Among TopVerdict.com’s Top 20 Civil Rights Settlements in California in 2017 appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Federal Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Uber in Lawsuit to Keep Drivers as Independent Contractors

On September 25, 2018, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal handed over a major victory to the ride-sharing giant Uber Technologies Inc. in a battle between Uber and a class of thousands of Uber drivers alleging they were misclassified as independent contractors. In the lawsuit, the Uber drivers claimed Uber had been successfully skirting labor laws by classifying its drivers as independent contractors rather than employees and alleged that the arbitration clause Uber required its drivers to sign upon hiring was unlawful. A three-judge panel of the federal appeals court voted unanimously to determine that arbitration agreements between Uber and its drivers were lawful and enforceable based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Epic Systems ruling.

The Impact:

The federal appeals court ruling in favor of Uber means that drivers seeking to be classified as employees rather than independent contractors must arbitrate their claims individually and not pursue class action lawsuits. That ruling was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. So, what’s the big deal?

Class action lawsuits allow people to collectively sue and potentially obtain greater recoveries than if forced to sue individually. There’s strength in numbers, but without a class certification, many individuals will not be able to afford to take on a tech giant like Uber in an individual lawsuit and will likely never get their day in court.

Drivers allege that Uber misclassified them as independent contractors to avoid having to reimburse them for expenses such as gas, vehicle maintenance and other various expenses related to driving a car. Another claim alleged that Uber was not allowing their drivers to keep all of the tips they obtained from passengers. Uber has since faced multiple lawsuits demanding that its drivers be classified as employees, who would then be entitled to minimum wage, overtime and other benefits not afforded to contractors.

Explaining Employment Law:

Willful misclassification is the act of a company knowingly misclassifying an employee as an independent contractor for its own benefit. Misclassified employees are often categorized incorrectly when it comes to the terms of their employment, denying them access to benefits, overtime pay and expense reimbursement, as well as other protections employees are entitled to by law. Anyone who believes they have been misclassified as an independent contractor can file a wage claim with the Labor Commissioner’s Office.

What should I do if I feel I’m being treated unfairly as an employee?

Since the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling on Uber’s arbitration clause, we urge all Uber drivers or anyone who feels they may have been subjected to employment misclassification to contact us immediately regarding your options. Call McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP at 866.664.3055 or visit our website for a free consultation.

Sources:

www.law360.com

www.theverge.com

The post Federal Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Uber in Lawsuit to Keep Drivers as Independent Contractors appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Are Consumers at Risk? The Hidden Dangers of Using E-cigarettes

Consumers have turned to e-cigarettes as an alternative way to get a nicotine fix without the harmful effects of smoking a traditional cigarette. However, defective e-cigarettes pose an entirely new set of risks that have become increasingly dangerous.

In 2017, more than 120 lawsuits were filed in the United States by plaintiffs who were either hurt or killed by an exploding e-cigarette.

Plaintiffs consistently complain that U.S. distributors import their vaporizer products from China in order to minimize costs and have poor quality control testing. Defendants and advocates of vaping are alleging that e-cigarette-related injuries are largely due to user error and manipulation of the products. Despite the possibility that lithium batteries may be an unsafe energy source for these types of devices, there are no regulatory standards directly applicable to e-cigarettes, leaving it up to the manufacturer to determine the safety of its products.

Although originally intended to provide a healthier alternative to inhaling cigarette smoke, the potential risks associated with using e-cigarettes may outweigh the benefits.

How Serious Are E-cigarette Explosions?

E-cigarette explosions are largely caused by the infamous lithium batteries, which have caused similar explosions and forced the recall of other electronic devices, including Dell laptop computers and the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphone. However, e-cigarettes are even more dangerous because of the proximity of the device to the mouth. In many cases, the devices have spontaneously exploded in the user’s mouth or hands, leading to severe chemical injuries. According to medical literature, blast injuries have led to tooth loss, traumatic tattooing and extensive loss of soft tissue, requiring surgical operations.

Know Your Rights: Who Is Liable for E-Cigarette Explosions?

Consumers have filed both product liability and personal injury lawsuits for e-cigarette explosions. In general, the claims filed in these lawsuits have stated:

Negligence on behalf of the manufacturer or of the distributor for failing to alert consumers of the dangers.

Defective design of the device, making it unreasonably dangerous even when used properly.

Injuries resulting from explosions that require medical attention.

Victims who have suffered from a malfunctioning product are also being victimized by expensive medical bills linked to their injuries.

If you have been injured by an e-cigarette, consult a lawyer about your options. Call McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP at 866.664.3055 or visit our website for a free consultation.

  Sources:

https://www.courthousenews.com/vape-battery-explosion-lawsuits-on-the-rise/

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1608478#t=article

The post Are Consumers at Risk? The Hidden Dangers of Using E-cigarettes appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.

[mcnicholaslaw]

Families of Paradise Fire Victims Sue PG&E for Wrongful Death

Attorneys Hold Press Conference Demanding Justice for Deadliest Wildfire in California History

CHICO, CA – Trial law firms Frantz Law Group, APLC; McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP; and Bridgford, Gleason & Artinian have filed a wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of Lonnie Walker and several other surviving families against Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) for allegedly causing the devastating Camp/Paradise Fire that claimed the lives of 85 people. According to the lawsuit, PG&E failed to adhere to electrical and fire safety practices, resulting in poorly maintained power lines that sparked above overgrown vegetation, igniting the deadliest wildfire in California history. The Camp/Paradise Fire is at least the eleventh wildfire within the past year that this trio of trial law firms have sued PG&E for allegedly causing.

“PG&E consciously disregarded the safety of the communities it serves, resulting in 85 innocent lives lost,” said James Frantz, CEO of Frantz Law Group, APLC. “This tragedy could have been completely avoided if PG&E had taken reasonable precautions (e.g., de-energized its lines in high wind conditions and maintained electrical equipment) to protect the communities it serves from a clearly foreseeable risk. This litigation will send a message to PG&E that its misconduct will not be tolerated.”

“PG&E is maintaining a corporate culture of placing profits over people,” said Richard Bridgford, partner at Bridgford, Gleason & Artinian. “Only a few weeks before the fire, in proceedings related to the 2010 San Bruno explosion, a judge with the California Public Utilities Commission stated that he was concerned ‘whether PG&E is truly changing its culture, or is just trying to ‘check the boxes.’’ Our firms have the experience, resources and determination to stand up to PG&E and tell them enough is enough. No more lost lives and no more destruction of our homes and neighborhoods.”

“Had PG&E followed the standard of care in inspecting, repairing and maintaining its high-powered electrical equipment, as required by law and industry standards, the catastrophic Camp/Paradise Fire could have been avoided,” said Patrick McNicholas, partner at McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP. “This is a devastating blow to the community and we want to ensure that PG&E is held completely accountable for the death of these people and destruction of our communities.”

According to the lawsuit, PG&E has at least 20 years of well-documented knowledge, experience and consequences resulting from their substandard safety protocols and conscious disregard for the safety of the communities it serves, including billions of dollars in fines and hundreds of criminal convictions. It is alleged that the same corporate decision-making scheme was behind the causes of PG&E’s other major utility-failure catastrophes, including the Trauner Fire (1994); Mission District Fire (2003); Rancho Cordova Explosion (2008); San Bruno Explosion (2010); Cupertino Explosion (2011); Carmel Explosion (2014); Butte Fire (2015); and Wine Country Fires (2017).

Background Information

On November 8, 2018, at approximately 6:15 a.m., PG&E submitted an electrical incident report to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), advising that it had experienced an outage on a transmission line near the Camp/Paradise Fire origin. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection estimates that the Camp/Paradise Fire ignited at approximately 6:33 a.m., destroying more than 150,000 acres, leaving residents mere minutes to escape—and unfortunately, many did not. Those who survived lost loved ones, their land, their home and everything inside of it.

Days before the fire, PG&E was allegedly aware of high-powered lines causing sparks in the vicinity of where the Camp/Paradise Fire started, and had also advised residents in Butte County that power may be shut off on November 8 and 9 due to weather conditions and risk of wildfire. Despite these warnings, PG&E did not turn off the power on November 8.

According to the lawsuit, preliminary investigations indicate that the Camp/Paradise Fire’s ignition originated with negligently operated, repaired and maintained electrical equipment, as well as poor electrical and fire safety practices, including substandard repair practices, maintenance practices, vegetation management practices and others. In recent years, independent reviews of PG&E infrastructure have shown that tens of thousands of miles of its overhead lines are in disrepair. Additionally, investigations have discovered that in 36% of PG&E’s downed-line incidents, such as the incident leading up to the Camp/Paradise Fire, the company failed in remotely de-energizing power lines, leading to a direct cause of fires.

Filed on behalf of Lonnie Walker, individually and as a successor in interest to Ellen Victoria, and other surviving families, the lawsuit is one of many mass tort lawsuits filed by this trio of law firms against PG&E for allegedly causing the Camp/Paradise Fire. Frantz Law Group, APLC; McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP; and Bridgford, Gleason & Artinian currently represent nearly 2,000 homeowners in Northern and Southern California against PG&E and Southern California Edison for deaths and property loss spawning from the 2017 and 2018 Northern and Southern California fires, including the Tubbs Fire, Atlas Fire, Nuns Fire, Redwood Valley Complex Fire (aka “Wine Country Fires”), and the Thomas Fire/Mudslides in Santa Barbara, Ventura and Montecito.

###

Frantz Law Group, APLC, a California-based law firm, represents more than 10,000 victims against various utility companies for their negligence in causing environmental disasters, including wildfires and mudslides. With over 100 combined years of trial and litigation experience, Frantz Law Group, APLC, has successfully obtained tens of millions of dollars in verdicts and settlements for victims of wrongful death and property damage of public utility negligence for their failures to safely maintain their electrical equipment.*

Frantz Law Group, APLC

Chico Office

236 Broadway Street, Suite B

Chico, CA 95928

Phone: 530-423-6774

  Sacramento Office

770 L Street, Suite 950

Sacramento, CA 95814

Phone: 916-492-6059

  Santa Rosa Office

3558 Round Barn Blvd., Suite 215

Santa Rosa, CA 95403

Phone: 707-236-6316

Fax: 619-525-7672

  www.frantzlawgroup.com

  *Results in other matters do not constitute a guarantee, warranty or prediction. This advertisement is not a guarantee or prediction of any recovery as each case is dependent on its particular facts.

James P. Frantz, Esq.; Patrick McNicholas, Esq.; and Richard Bridgford, Esq. are responsible for the contents of this

press release.

The post Families of Paradise Fire Victims Sue PG&E for Wrongful Death appeared first on McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP.