LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS

If you enjoy our CASENOTES, purchase our Thumbprint Guides for a more in-depth legal analysis of specific areas of the law:

Thumbprint Guides
A sub print of LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS

Thumbprint guides are area specific guides by James G. Randall, Esq. Short, concise, and to the point, Thumbprint guides provide all of the necessary information and forms successful litigators need thus keeping the LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS.

Thumbprint guides may be purchased in the following formats: Print from Lulu Publishing.

Coming soon in Protected PDF and E-Book (Formatted for electronic readers, such as the Amazon Kindle, Nook, and Apple iOS Devices).

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON DISCOVERY

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON ADMISSIONS OF POLICE REPORTS AND OPINIONS

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON ASSUMPTION OF RISK: SPORTS, RECREATION, AND OCCUPATION

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT EXPERTS: SUMMARY OF LAW ON THE USE OF EXPERTS IN LITIGATION

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON PREMISES LIABILITY ISSUES AND LAW

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON ADMISSION OF MEDICAL BILLS

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON LAW AND MOTION

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON NEGLIGENT SECURITY

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON AUTOMOBILES

LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS – THUMBPRINT GUIDE ON TRIALS

_______________________________

The following CASENOTES are on various topics and areas of possible legal matters. Each CASENOTE can be downloaded and saved while viewing via your iPhone or iPad by clicking on the link and selecting open in iBooks (Or any other PDF application you may have installed on your mobile device). For more information on applications or if your device can read PDF files please consult your mobile device manufacturer.

Documents here are saved in the PDF document format.

These newsletters are authored by James Grafton Randall, Esq. For informational purposes only:

August 2023:

CASENOTE PLAINTIFF’S ACTION FOR INJURIES SUSTAINED AFTER DIVING INTO SHALLOW WATER BARRED BY RECREATIONAL IMMUNITY

CASENOTE SITUATIONS WHERE THE EMPLOYEE CANNOT BE LOCATED AND RFAS WILL BE DEEMED ADMITTED IF NO TIMELY RESPONSE

July 2023:

CASENOTE EMPLOYER LIABLE FOR COSTS INCURRED BY EMPLOYEES TO DO THEIR WORK AT HOME DURING COVID

May 2022:

CASENOTE VENDOR DOING DEMONSTRATIONS IN STORE OWES DUTY TO MAKE ENTIRE STORE SAFE NOT JUST LIMITED AREA IN CONTRACT WITH STORE OWNER

April 2022:

CASENOTE: EMPLOYER NOT LIABLE WHEN EMPLOYEE DRIVING HOME FROM WORK COLLIDED WITH PLAINTIFFS. “GOING AND COMING RULE”

March 2022:

CASENOTE: SUMMARY JUDGMENT WAS PROPER DUE TO THE EXPRESS ASSUMPTION OF THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH A STUDENT’S PARTICIPATION IN THE FOOTBALL PROGRAM. 

CASENOTE: COURT HAS JURISDICTION TO LIFT STAY ON MATTER ORDERED TO ARBITRATION IF PLAINTIFF CANNOT AFFORD ARBITRATION COSTS

January 2022:

CASENOTE: COURT OF APPEALS REJECTS “BASEBALL RULE”. COLLEGE MAY BE LIABLE FOR SPECTATOR STRUCK BY BASEBALL IN UNSCREENED AREA.

CASENOTES: SUPREME COURT HOLDS COSTS FOR EXHIBITS UNUSED AT TRIAL ONLY RECOVERABLE AT DISCRETION OF COURT

August 2021:

CASENOTE: LANDOWNER DELEGATES TO CONTRACTOR A DUTY TO ENSURE SAFETY OF ITS WORKERS

July 2021:

CASENOTE: CONTINUANCE UNDER SECTION 437c SUBDIVISON

April 2021:

CASENOTE: CRIMINAL RESTITUTION

March 2021:

CASENOTE: FAMILY MEMBER WHO DID NOT OWN GUN HELD LIABLE WHEN AIDE HIRED TO TAKE CARE OF INVALID FATHER SHOT BY LOADED GUN THAT FELL OUT OF FATHER’S CLOSET

CASENOTE: OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL LINES NOT AN OPEN AND OBVIOUS CONDITION AND DEFENDANTS OWED A DUTY TO WARN

CASENOTE: A section 998 offer lacking an acceptance provision makes a judgment based on such acceptance void. The Court rejected the argument that a rule requiring offers to include an acceptance provision in order to give rise to an enforceable judgment under section 998, subdivision (b)(1) will defeat the statute’s goals of “eliminating uncertainty” and “encouraging settlement.” On the contrary, it is an application of the “bright-line rule” articulated in Perez, which “require[s] the parties to comply with the provisions [of section 998] the Legislature has deemed necessary” by “invalidating an offer when it omits an acceptance provision, or any other statutorily required provision.

February 2021:

CASENOTE: SUING A DEAD PERSON

CASENOTE: RECREATIONAL IMMUNITY

January 2021:

CASENOTE: The Golden Rule argument that the jurors should “imagine” it was their daughter that was taken away, and that appellants’ trial attorney had lied and delayed settlement to commit a fraud was prejudicial and requires reversal. Also trial court erred in not allowing comparative negligence of parties who had settled

CASENOTE: CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NIED MAY BE STATED FOR OBSERVING LIVESTREAM ABUSE OF RELATIVE

CASENOTE: TRIABLE ISSUES OF FACT WHETHER DEFENDANT INCREASED THE RISK IN VIOLENT CHECKING PROCEDURE IN NO-CHECK HOCKEY GAME RESULTING IN SERIOUS INJURIES. FURTHER TRIABLE ISSUE OF FACT EXISTS AS TO WHETHER CONDUCT WAS INTENTIONAL AND WHETHER PUNITIVES ARE AVAILABLE.

August 2020:

CASENOTE: SUDDEN EMERGENCY DOCTRINE
CASENOTE: California Supreme Court rules that an intentional tortfeasor is [not] entitled to a reduction or apportionment of noneconomic damages under section 1431.2, subdivision (a). [Proposition 51].

June 2020:

CASENOTE:A live pet animal sold in its unaltered state is not a product subject to the design defect consumer expectations theory of strict products liability
CASENOTE: COSTS MAY BE RECOVERED FOR EXHIBITS PREPARED FOR TRIAL BUT NOT USED
CASENOTE: THE CLAIM OF THE FAMILY OF EMPLOYEE OF AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR IS BARRED BY PRIVETTE

May 2020:

CASENOTE: OPERATOR OF WATER PARK IS A COMMON CARRIER AND ASSUMPTION OF RISK DOES NOT APPLY. FURTHER, PROVIDING A WATER SLIDE IS NOT A SERVICE, THUS PRODUCTS LIABILITY APPLIESCASENOTE: Does a company’s name and logo appearing on an invoice constitute hearsayCASENOTE: LYFT not liable if driver not in course and scope of transporting passengers pursuant to LYFT agreement

MARCH 2020:

CASENOTE: The question posed in this appeal is whether a father who provides financial support for his adult son may be held liable for the death of his son’s girlfriend by overdose on methamphetamine allegedly purchased or supplied by the adult son.

FEBURARY 2020:

CASENOTE: PROTECTIVE NETTING AND PERCEIVED DANGER ZONESCASENOTE: PRIVETTE MITIGATION CASENOTE: CAR JUMPS CURB OTHER INCIDENTS

JULY 2019:

CASENOTE: CASENOTES JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT REVERSED BASED ON ERRONEOUS NEGLIGENCE PER SE INSTRUCTIONSCASENOTE:TRIAL COURT ERRED IN NOT AWARDING COSTS FOR DENIAL OF RFA’S IN UM MOTORIST ARBITRATION PROCEEDING CASENOTE:COURT AFFIRMS MSJ IN FAVOR OF SHOPPING CENTER IN THIRD PARTY ASSAULT CASE

JUNE 2019:

CASENOTE: The burden of showing “reasonable grounds” for denial of RFAS rests on the party seeking to avoid paying costs. The party denying an RFA “is not responsible for [the propounding party’s] costs if it shows it ‘had reasonable ground to believe [it] would prevail on the matter.’CASENOTE: PARTY (DEFENDANT) SEEKING TO REDUCE FUTURE DAMAGES TO PRESENT VALUE OR PARTY (PLAINTIFF) SEEKING AN UPWARD ADJUSTMENT OF FUTURE DAMAGES TO ACCOUNT FOR INFLATION BEARS THE BURDEN OF PROVING AN APPROPRIATE METHOD FOR DOING SO. DAMAGES MAY NOT BE ADJUSTED WITHOUT EVIDENCE OF SUCH METHODCASENOTE: APPELLATE COURT VACATES $1 MILLION DEFAULT JUDGMENT WITH EXCELLENT DISCUSSION OF CIVILITY AND PROFESSIONALISM EXPECTED OF ATTORNEYS

• CASENOTE: DUTY OF GOLF COURSE OPERATORS TO MAINTAIN THEIR PROPERTY IN A REASONABLE SAFE CONDITION INCLUDES A DUTY TO EXERCISE REASONABLE CARE TO PROTECT PATRONS FROM NESTS OF YELLOW JACKETS
  

JUNE 2018:

• CASENOTE: COURT AFFIRMS MSJ IN FAVOR OF SKI RESORT WHEN SKIIER COLLIDES WITH SKI REMOVAL MACHINE
• CASENOTE: APPELLATE COURT AFFIRMS MSJ FOR STORE IN CASE WHERE PLAINTIFF SUSTAINED INJURIES IN “SLIP AND FALL” STATING FLOOR WAS “SLIPPERY” BUT NEITHER SHE OR ANYONE ELSE SAW ANYTHING ON THE FLOOR AFTER HER FALL. COURT REJECTED AVRIT’S OPINIONS AS SPECULATION
• CASENOTE: PREMISES OWED DUTY TO WARN PATRONS OF POSSIBILITY OF BLACK WIDOW SPIDERS AND WHETHER CONDUCT WAS REASONABLE IS A JURY ISSUE

MARCH 2018:

• CASENOTE: HOTEL OWED NO DUTY TO INVESTIGATE NOR TO TELL PLAINTIFF WHOSE SPOUSE CHECKED INTO HOTEL UNDER ASSUMED NAME WHEN SPOUSE COMMITS SUICIDE
  
• CASENOTE: HEARSAY AS TO INTERNET REVIEWS INADMISSIBLE IN SLIP AND FALL CASE
  

FEBRUARY 2018:

• CASENOTE: MSJ BY TRUCK COMPANY DENIED WHEN DRIVER RAN OVER MATTRESS IN ROADWAY, MATTRESS CAUGHT FIRE AND GAS TANK EXPLODED COURT HELD IT WAS FORESEEABLE A MAJOR TRUCK INCIDENT WOULD CAUSE A FREEWAY BACKUP RESULTING IN A REAR-END COLLISION BY VEHICLES MORE THAN A THOUSAND FEET AWAY
  
• CASENOTE: HEIRS CLAIM FOR DEATH OF SCUBA DIVER BARRED BY EXPRESS ASSUMPTION OF RISK. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE
  
• CASENOTE: COURT SUSTAINS DEMURRER IN “INTOXICATED MINOR CLAIM” FOR FAILURE TO SPECIFICALLY PLEAD FACTS ESTABLISHING HOW DFENDANTS FURNISHED ALCOHOL
  
• CASENOTE: MSJ FIRE CAUSATION
  
• CASENOTE: AMUSEMENT RIDES AND THE “COMMON CARRIER DOCTRINE” IN CALIFORNIA
  
• CASENOTE: JOINT UNALLOCATED 998 OFFER MADE BY HEIRS OF DECEDENTS TO DEFENDENTS IS VALID
  

JANUARY 2018:

• CASENOTE: LIABILITY OF SPIDER BITES
  

AUGUST 2017:

• CASENOTE (CORRECTED): PLAINTIFF’S EXPERT MAY NOT OFFER OPINIONS AT TRIAL AS TO INJURY CAUSATION WHERE SUCH AN OPINION WAS NOT INDICATED IN THE EXPERT DESIGNATION. MERELY STATING EXPERT WILL TESTIFY AS TO “NATURE AND EXTENT” OF INJURIES DOES NOT INCLUDE “CAUSATION”
  
• CASENOTE: REAL ESTATE BROKER NOT LIABLE WHEN PROSPECTIVE BUYER STOOD ON DIVING BOARD OF HOUSE FOR SALE TO LOOK OVER FENCE, BOARD BROKE AND PLAINTIFF FELL INTO EMPTY POOL. CONDITION OF POOL WAS OPEN AND OBVIOUS AND INCIDENT NOT FORESEEABLE
  

JULY 2017:

• CASENOTE: PRIVETTE BARS CLAIM; MSJ AFFIRMED. HIRER WAS NOT ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN NOR ASSERTED CONTROL OVER THE MANNER OF THE PERFORMANCE OF THE CONTRACTED WORK. PLAINTIFF HAD BURDEN TO ESTABLISH OTHERWISE
  
• CASENOTE: PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM FOR INJURIES WHEN HORSE STRUCK HIM BARRED BY ASSUMPTION OF RISK. RIDERS IN ORGANIZED RIDING ACTIVITY DO NOT HAVE TO BE COMPETING AGAINST EACH OTHER. THE OFFENDING HORSE WAS JUST BEING A HORSE.
  
• CASENOTE: COURT AFFIRMS MSJ FOR DEFENDANTS IN MATTER WHERE PLAINTIFF CLAIMED INJURIES DUE TO SUDDEN DROP OF ELEVATOR. WHILE THIS CASE IS UNPUBLISHED IT CONTAINS AN EXCELLENT DISCUSSION IN: (1) BURDEN SHIFTS TO PLAINTIFF BASED ON INSUFFICIENT DISCOVERY RESPONSES; (2) INSUFFICIENT EXPERT DECLARATION FOR PLAINTIFF: (3) RES IPSA LOQUITUR NOT APPLICABLE WITHOUT EXPERT OPINION; AND, (4) TRIAL COURT PROPERLY DENIED PLAINTIFF REQUEST FOR A CONTINUANCE
  
• CASENOTE: TRIAL COURT DID NOT ERR IN EXCLUDING DEFENSE EXPERT OPINION AS TO POSSIBLE EFFECT OF DRUGS AT TIME OF ACCIDENT AS SUCH OPINIONS WERE SPECULATIVE.
  

MAY 2017:

• CASENOTE: PRIVETTE BARS WORKER’S CLAIM
  
• CASENOTE: COURT ALLOWS EVIDENCE OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT [ACA] IN DETERMINING FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES
  

APRIL 2017:

• CASENOTE: SIMPLY BECAUSE DOCTOR PRACTICES IN MEXICO DOES NOT DISQUALIFY HIM TO OFFER AN OPINION IN A CALIFORNIA MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CASE.
  
• CASENOTE: WHETHER ONE WAS ON A SPECIAL ERRAND AND IN THE COURSE AND SCOPE IS A TRIABLE ISSUE OF FACT
  
• CASENOTE: MINOR CAN’T SUE RELATIVES FOR INJURIES ON A SKI SLOPE WHICH MINOR CLAIMS HE WAS MADE TO GO ON THAT EXCEEDED HIS SKILL LEVEL
  
• CASENOTE: THE RECREATIONAL IMMUNITY STATUTE DOES NOT APPLY TO ONE WITH A NONPOSSESSORY INTEREST IN PROPERTY AND RECEIVED NO PORTION FEE FOR ENTRANCE WHICH IS PAID TO THE LANDOWNER
  

MARCH 2017:

• CASENOTE: MSJ AFFIRMED FOR LANDOWNER– CONDITION OF STEP OPEN AND OBVIOUS. LANDOWNER NOT INSURER OF SAFETY. NO DUTY TO PERFORM HOME INSPECTION BEFORE PUTTING HOUSE UP FOR SALE.
  
• CASENOTE: STUDENT’S CLAIM FOR INJURIES SUSTAINED WHILE PLAYING TOUCH FOOTBALL DURING SCHOOL HOURS BARRED BY ASSUMPTION OF RISK DESPITE ALLEGATIONS OF TEACHERS FAILURE TO SUPERVISE
  
• CASENOTE: DEFENDANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO A VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION EXAMINATION OF THE PLAINTIFF IN A CIVIL CASE AS THERE IS NO CODE SECTION ALLOWING FOR SUCH EXAMINATIONS
  

FEBRUARY 2017:

• CASENOTE: HOA OWED NO DUTY WHEN TENANT SHOT BY ANOTHER TENANT AND PLAINTIFF IS NOW A QUADRIPLEGIC. MSJ AFFIRMED.
  
• CASENOTE: COMPANY OWED INJURED MOTORISTS NO DUTY IN LOADING TRUCK OF DRIVER WHO WAS INTOXICATED AT THEIR LOADING DOCK AND ALLOWING HIM TO GET BACK ON ROAD
  
• CASENOTE: A party may not raise a triable issue of fact at summary judgment by relying on evidence that will not be admissible at trial. Therefore when a party fails to timely exchange expert designation it may not then use experts to try to defeat an MSJ
  
• CASENOTE: TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE NOT IN COURSE AND SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT WHEN HE BECOMES INVOLVED IN ACCIDENT KILLING ONE PERSON BECAUSE HE WAS TIRED FROM LENGTH OF DRIVE
  
• CASENOTE: CASENOTE: MSJ REVERSED TRIP ON STEP
  
• CASENOTE: GYM WAS PROVIDER OF SERVICES BARRING CLAIM FOR STRICT PRODUCT LIABILITY CLAIM FOR INJURIES WHILE WORKING OUT IN GYM BARRED BY ASSUMPTION OF RISK
  
• CASENOTE: CACI INSTRUCTIONS NOT MANDATORY
  

JANUARY 2017:

• CASENOTE: COURT PROVIDES LENGTHY DISCUSSION AS TO ADEQUACY OF SPECIFICATIONS FOR NEW TRIAL. REJECTS PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIM OF INADEQUATE WRONGFUL DEATH DAMAGES FOR DEATH OF FATHER WORKING IN CALIFORNIA WHEN FAMILY IN MEXICO
  
• CASENOTE: TRIAL COURT GRANT OF DEFENDANTS MSJ AFFIRMED. MEDICAL EXPERT NOT QUALIFIED ON CAUSATION; MAY NOT SIMPLY REGURGITATE STUDIES HE READ
  
• CASENOTE: TRIAL COMMENCED WHEN PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL SELECTED AND TAKES THE OATH, NOT WHEN FIRST WITNESS IS CALLED NOR WHEN JURY SELECTED
  
• CASENOTE: ATTORNEY FEES NOT RECOVERABLE FOR TRIP AND FALL ON RENTAL PROPERTY AS INCIDENT DID NOT ARISE UNDER THE RENTAL AGREEMENT
  
• CASENOTE: DAMAGES NOT RECOVERABLE FOR DAMAGE TO REPAIRED LEASED VEHICLE