Skip to main content

phoneFREE CASE EVALUATION (866) 999-9085

 About Adam Peck

Adam J. Peck, ESQ is a principal with Peck Law Group, APC. In 2008, Mr. Adam Peck received his Juris Doctorate from Whittier Law School where he graduated Cum Laude. His practice is primarily dedicated to representing Elders, Dependent Adults, along with their loved ones and family members, who have suffered horrific personal injuries.

Timely Accident Investigation and Reconstruction Is Extremely Important in Effectuating Maximum Personal Injury Recovery

Accident investigation and accident reconstruction are commonly heard terms, but what exactly are they. The following discussion will attempt to shed some light on these processes.

After a motor vehicle accident occurs, particularly one resulting in severe injuries or death, it will usually be investigated and sometimes be reconstructed. There are two primary types of people that perform these duties, the police and independent investigators.

The police will investigate an accident with the intention of determining if any criminal action took place in the accident. Some of the things the police look for are speeding, hours-of-service violations, mechanical violations, alcohol use, drug use, etc. For example, if a truck driver is exceeding his hours of service and causes a serious accident because he fell asleep at the wheel, he will likely be criminally charged. If that accident results in a fatality, the charge will likely be homicide.

Independent investigators are normally hired by the insurance companies or attorneys of the parties involved in an accident. The job of the independent investigator is to analyze the causes of the accident so that liability and/or financial responsibility can be determined. These independent investigators are often off-duty police officers, retired police officers, automotive technologists, or engineers. However, investigators from many other backgrounds are also common.

An accident investigation can consist of many aspects. However, the investigation usually starts with an inspection of the accident site. At the site, measurements are taken of evidence left by the vehicles such as point of impact, final resting positions, skid marks, scrub marks, and gouge marks. These measurements are usually taken using electronic surveying equipment. With this equipment, a computer-generated scale diagram can be produced and may be used to reconstruct the accident.

Vehicle inspections are another typical part of the accident investigation. These inspections will usually include measuring the amount of damage and damage profile of the vehicles. This information will be useful if an accident reconstruction is performed. The mechanical components of the vehicles such as brakes, steering, tires, suspension, lights, etc. may also be inspected and tested to determine if the condition of these components was a causative factor in the accident. The investigation might also include looking at driver qualifications, auditing logbooks, or reviewing other motor carrier compliance related materials.

With the accident investigation complete, an accident reconstruction can be performed. Reconstruction is the process of using physics to determine the speeds of the vehicles, and/or their relative positions at different times during the accident sequence. Information such as pre- and post-impact direction of travel, length of pre-impact skid marks, post-impact distances moved, friction values for the various surfaces the vehicles traveled over, point of impact, impact angles, and weights of the vehicles are all used as inputs into the equations used to reconstruct an accident.

There are many types of accident scenarios such as head-on, rear-end, right-angle, or roll-over. Each of these different scenarios requires a different method to reconstruct. However, generally speaking, an accident reconstruction will determine how much of a vehicle.s speed is lost in each part of a collision sequence. Take, for example, a vehicle that skids off the road and strikes a tree. A reconstruction of this accident would use the vehicle.s damage profile to calculate the speed at which the vehicle struck the tree and combine that with the amount of speed lost while the vehicle was skidding to determine the pre-braking speed of the vehicle.

A slightly more complex accident reconstruction involves two vehicles first skidding, then colliding with each other, then sliding to a stop. For this type of accident the method used is called the Conservation of Linear Momentum, which takes into account the weights of the vehicles, the angles at which they collided, and the places where they came to rest. To be more specific, take the example of two-vehicle collision where one vehicle is traveling due south the other vehicle is traveling due west. After these two vehicles collide, the rules of physics tell us they will move generally southwest, with all of the southward momentum resulting from the southbound vehicle and all of the westward momentum resulting from the west bound vehicle. If the reconstructionist knows how much each vehicle weighs, how far each vehicle moved south, and how far each vehicle moved west, then he can calculate a collision speed for each of the vehicles. This collision speed for each vehicle can then be combined with its speed loss from pre-collision skidding to calculate its pre-braking speed.

Continuing with this right-angle accident reconstruction, the pre-braking speeds can be used to both look at time-distance relationships before collision and to pose .what-if. questions. For example, if one of the vehicles was found to be speeding before collision, the reconstructionist could pose the question what would have happen had that vehicle not been speeding. By moving that vehicle at its calculated speed back from the initial braking point by say 1.5 seconds for a normal driver perception-reaction time, the reconstructionist can determine a point of perception. Then by asking what if that driver had been traveling at the speed limit, had taken 1.5 seconds to perceive and react, and had locked the brakes, the reconstructionist can determine if the accident could have been avoided if the driver had simply obeyed the speed limit.

The PECK LAW GROUP specializes in personal injury matters relating to Serious and Catastrophic Injury, Nursing Home Abuse and Neglect, Bed Sores, Decubitus Ulcers, and Pressure Sores, Medical Malpractice, Surgery Errors, Traumatic Brain Injury, Birth Injury and Wrongful Death that are determined to be a breach of the standard of care.  Our experts and our attorneys have superior knowledge and know how in handling these type of matters from inception to Trial if need be.  You will receive superior representation and of course the best possible result based upon our know how and expertise.

Call us Now.  THE PECK LAW GROUP In Southern California at (818) 908-0509; In Northern California at (925) 808-5708; or all across the United States toll free at (866) 999-9085

In California There Are Very Strict Pleading Requirements In Elder Abuse Cause of Actions

California’s Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act

The Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 15600 et seq.) (Act) permits “private, civil enforcement of laws against elder abuse and neglect.” (Delaney v. Baker (1999) 20 Cal.4th 23, 33.) The Act provides enhanced remedies to a plaintiff who proves “by clear and convincing evidence” that a defendant committed physical abuse or neglect of a person 65 years of age or older and that the defendant acted with “recklessness, oppression, fraud, or malice” in the commission of such abuse or neglect. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 15657.)

Under the Act, neglect is “[t]he negligent failure of any person having the care or custody of an elder or a dependent adult to exercise that degree of care that a reasonable person in a like position would exercise.” (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 15610.57, subd. (a)(1).) “Neglect includes, but is not limited to, all of the following: (1) Failure to assist in personal hygiene, or in the provision of food, clothing, or shelter. (2) Failure to provide medical care for physical and mental health needs. . . . (3) Failure to protect from health and safety hazards. (4) Failure to prevent malnutrition or dehydration. . . .” (Id. at § 15610.57, subd. (b) (1)-(4).) The “statutory definition of `neglect’ speaks not of the undertaking of medical services, but of the failure to provide medical care. [Citation.]” (Covenant Care, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 771, 783.) Consequently, the Act does not apply to negligent acts in the rendition of medical care. (Delaney v. Baker, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 34.)

To establish a defendant’s culpability, “a plaintiff must prove more than simple or even gross negligence in the provider’s care or custody of the elder. [Citations.]” (Carter v. Prime Healthcare Paradise Valley LLC, supra, 198 Cal.App.4th at p. 405.) Recklessness, although not defined in the Act, has been interpreted as “a subjective state of culpability greater than simple negligence, which has been described as a `deliberate disregard’ of the `high degree of probability’ that an injury will occur[.]” (Delaney v. Baker, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 31.) “Recklessness, unlike negligence, involves more than `inadvertence, incompetence, unskillfulness, or a failure to take precautions’ but rather rises to the level of a `conscious choice of a course of action . . . with knowledge of the serious danger to others involved in it.’ [Citation.]” (Id. at pp. 31-32.) “Oppression, fraud and malice `involve “intentional,” “willful,” or “conscious” wrongdoing of a “despicable” or “injurious” nature.’ [Citation.]” (Carter, at p. 405, quoting Delaney, at p. 31.)

In summary, to plead a cause of action for elder abuse under the Act based on neglect, a plaintiff must allege facts establishing that the defendant: “(1) had responsibility for meeting the basic needs of the elder or dependent adult,” including medical care; “(2) knew of conditions that made the elder or dependent adult unable to provide for his or her own basic needs”; and “(3) denied or withheld goods or services necessary to meet the elder or dependent adult’s basic needs, either with knowledge that injury was substantially certain . . . or with conscious disregard for the high probability of such injury . . . .” (Carter v. Prime Healthcare Paradise Valley LLC, supra, 198 Cal.App.4th at pp. 406-407.) A plaintiff also must allege facts demonstrating that the neglect caused the elder or dependent adult to suffer physical harm, pain or mental suffering such that the causal link between the neglect and injury is specifically alleged. (Id. at p. 407.)

In addition, to pursue a cause of action against an employer based on the acts of one or more employees, a plaintiff must plead facts that would permit imposition of punitive damages against an employer as specified in Civil Code section 3294, subdivision (b). (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 15657, subd. (c).) Such facts are that (1) “the employer had advance knowledge of the unfitness of the employee and employed him or her with a conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others”; or (2) the employer “authorized or ratified the wrongful conduct”; and (3) the employer’s conduct was “on the part of an officer, director, or managing agent of the corporation.” (Civ. Code, § 3294, subd. (b).)

The PECK LAW GROUP specializes in personal injury matters relating to Serious and Catastrophic Injury, Nursing Home Abuse and Neglect, Bed Sores, Decubitus Ulcers, and Pressure Sores, Medical Malpractice, Surgery Errors, Traumatic Brain Injury, Birth Injury and Wrongful Death that are determined to be a breach of the standard of care.  Our experts and our attorneys have superior knowledge and know-how in handling these type of matters from inception to Trial if need be.  You will receive superior representation and, of course, the best possible result based upon our know-how and expertise.

Call us Now.  THE PECK LAW GROUP In Southern California at (818) 908-0509; In Northern California at (925) 808-5708; or all across the United States toll-free at (866) 999-9085

– from Steven Peck, Senior Attorney at Peck Law Group
 

Standing In California Elder Abuse Cases Is Broadly Construed

The Elder Abuse Act and the Standing Provision, Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.3, subdivision (d).

“The purpose of the [Elder Abuse Act, (Welf. & Inst.Code, § 15600 et seq.)] is essentially to protect a particularly vulnerable portion of the population from gross mistreatment in the form of abuse and custodial neglect.” (Delaney v. Baker (1999) 20 Cal.4th 23, 33, 82 Cal.Rptr.2d 610, 971 P.2d 986; Buhai & Gilliam, Honor Thy Mother and Father: Preventing Elder Abuse Through Education and Litigation (2003) 36 Loyola L.A. L.Rev. 565, 569.)

Reporting and Criminal Prosecution

Originally, the Elder Abuse Act was designed to encourage the reporting of abuse and neglect of elders and dependent adults. (Delaney v. Baker, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 33, 82 Cal.Rptr.2d 610, 971 P.2d 986; Covenant Care, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 771, 779, 11 Cal.Rptr.3d 222, 86 P.3d 290; ARA Living Centers-Pacific, Inc. v. Superior Court (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 1556, 1559, 23 Cal.Rptr.2d 224 (ARA Living Centers).) It also provided for criminal prosecution of such cases. (E.g., Pen.Code, § 368.) However, elder abuse lawsuits were seldom pursued as few attorneys would handle the cases, partially because survival statutes did not permit compensation if the elder died before a verdict was rendered Then, the Legislature shifted the focus. The statutory scheme was modified to provide incentives for private, civil enforcement through lawsuits against elder abuse and neglect. (Covenant Care, Inc. v. Superior Court, supra, at p. 779, 11 Cal.Rptr.3d 222, 86 P.3d 290; Delaney v. Baker, supra, at p. 33, 82 Cal.Rptr.2d 610, 971 P.2d 986; ARA Living Centers, supra, at p. 1560, 23 Cal.Rptr.2d 224.)

Subject to statutory criteria and limitations, the statutory scheme now permits heightened remedies. These include pain and suffering damages even after the abused elder dies, punitive damages, and attorney fee awards. (Welf. & Inst.Code, § 15657; Covenant Care, Inc. v. Superior Court, supra, 32 Cal.4th at pp. 778-780, 11 Cal.Rptr.3d 222, 86 P.3d 290; Delaney v. Baker, supra, 20 Cal.4th at pp. 33, 35, 82 Cal.Rptr.2d 610, 971 P.2d 986; Moskowitz,  Golden Age in the Golden State: Contemporary Legal Developments in Elder Abuse and Neglect (2003) 36 Loyola L.A. L.Rev. 589, 605-606.)

Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.3, subdivision (d), delineates who has standing to bring an elder abuse lawsuit after the death of an elder or dependent adult. Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.3, subdivision (d) states: “Upon petition, after the death of the elder or dependent adult, the right to maintain an action shall be transferred to the personal representative of the decedent, or if none, to the person or persons entitled to succeed to the decedent’s estate.”

The Legislature did not define the operative words in Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.3, subdivision (d). However, when Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.3 was added to the statutory scheme (Stats.1991, ch. 774 (Sen. Bill No. 679), § 3) the Legislature specified that the Elder Abuse Act was intended to “enable interested persons to engage attorneys to take up the cause of abused elderly persons and dependent adults.” (Welf. & Inst.Code, § 15600, subd. (j), italics added; added by Stats.1991, ch. 774 (Sen. Bill No. 679), § 2.) This statement of legislative intent suggests the Legislature intended a broad definition of standing in the context of elder abuse cases.

Any definition given to Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.3, subdivision (d) must be sufficiently elastic to fulfill the purposes of the Elder Abuse Act. A decision as to whether a person has standing may be intertwined with other issues in elder abuse cases. This approach is consistent with the one taken to determine who is an interested person entitled to file petitions for probate. (Prob.Code, § 48 [defining standing to file probate petition requires flexible approach]; Prob.Code, § 8000, subd. (a); Arman v. Bank of America (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 697, 701, 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 410 [under the Probate Code, who is an interested person for purposes of standing is fluid concept and is often necessary to resolve the substantive claim to the parties’ relationship prior to deciding standing issue];

Standing for purposes of the Elder Abuse Act must be analyzed in a manner that induces interested persons to report elder abuse and to file lawsuits against elder abuse and neglect. In this way, the victimized will be protected.

The PECK LAW GROUP specializes in personal injury matters relating to Serious and Catastrophic Injury, Nursing Home Abuse and Neglect, Bed Sores, Decubitus Ulcers, and Pressure Sores, Medical Malpractice, Surgery Errors, Traumatic Brain Injury, Birth Injury and Wrongful Death that are determined to be a breach of the standard of care.  Our experts and our attorneys have superior knowledge and know-how in handling these type of matters from inception to Trial if need be.  You will receive superior representation and, of course, the best possible result based upon our know-how and expertise.

Call us Now.  THE PECK LAW GROUP In Southern California at (818) 908-0509; In Northern California at (925) 808-5708; or all across the United States toll-free at (866) 999-9085

– from Steven Peck, Senior Attorney at Peck Law Group