Celebrating Cesar Chavez Day 2021

March 31st is Cesar Chavez Day, a holiday in California celebrating his birthday and contributions towards the civil rights movement he fought to benefit society’s most vulnerable populations. He was born on March 31st, 1927 and was an American farmworker, labor leader and civil rights activist who, with Dolores Huerta, co-founded the National Farm Workers Association (which later became the United Farm Workers). Many do not know that the legendary phrase of the Farmworkers’ Movement “Si, Se Puede!” wasn’t coined by Cesar Chavez, but by a woman named Dolores Huerta.

                       Dolores Huerta

Dolores Huerta, born and raised in Stockton CA, left her job as a teacher in the early 1950s and began serving on the leadership of the Stockton Community Service Organization. She founded the Agricultural Workers Association, set up voter registration drives, and pressed local governments for barrio improvements.

In 1955, she met the Executive Director of CSO, Cesar Chavez. They bonded immediately and realized they both had a passion for organizing farm workers. They resigned from CSO and founded the National Farm Workers Association in the spring of 1962.

Dolores Huerta was instrumental in securing aid for dependent families and disability insurance for California farm workers in 1963. She was a crucial advocate for the enactment of the Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975. She has received numerous awards for her community service and advocacy, including the Eugene V. Debs Foundation Outstanding American Award, the Presidential Eleanor Roosevelt Award for Human Rights and the Presidential Medal of Freedom, given to her by President Obama in 2012. She was the first Latina inducted into the National Women’s Hall of Fame in 1993.

Dolores Huerta is 90 years old and still advocating for migrant and farm workers’ rights. Californians celebrate Dolores Huerta Day on April 10th.

 

                      Larry Itliong (right)

Larry Itliong was a Filipino-American labor organizer whose story is not as well-known as others but is just as important to our history.

It has been said that Cesar Chavez inspired the world but that Larry Itliong inspired Cesar Chavez. In an era known for civil rights movements, Itliong fought for better working conditions in a country thousands of miles from his homeland of the Philippines.

Larry Itliong, also known as “Seven Fingers,” (the tales vary about how he lost the missing three) first came to the U.S. in 1929 when he was 15, never having slept in a bed or lived in a home with electricity. Soon, during the Great Depression, he joined striking lettuce workers in Washington State; later he would can fish in Alaska and help organize a cannery and agricultural workers’ union, leading his manong “brothers” as they followed the grapes, raisins, brussels sprouts and other crops up and down the spine of California. According to his son, Johnny Itliong, Larry was an excellent card player and avid cigar smoker, spoke numerous Filipino dialects as well as Spanish, Cantonese and Japanese, and taught himself about law by attending trials.

In 1965, Larry Itliong lead a grape strike in Delano that set the stage for the boycott that would lead Cesar Chavez, Dolores Huerta, and thousands of farmworker families to create the nation’s pioneering agricultural labor union, the United Farm Workers.

The historic Delano Grape Strike led by Itliong and the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee took place on September 8, 1965 and was soon joined by the Chavez-led National Farm Workers Association. Five years later, in 1966, the AWOC and NFWA merged to become the United Farm Workers, forever changing the face of agricultural labor in California.

Itliong spent his life standing up for his belief that “everyone has equal rights and justice, but you have to make that come about.” He died on Feb. 8, 1977, leaving a legacy of activism that inspires us all. Californians celebrate Larry Itliong Day on October 25th.

read more

E-Bikes — How to Stay Safe While Having Fun

Written By: Christopher B. Dolan and Taylor French

At a time when many of us are still stuck at home, socially distanced and trying to stay healthy, we might pick up a new hobby, like hiking, jogging or cycling that allows for escape. While the thought of being outside in the fresh air is certainly appealing, not everyone shares the same desire or ability to endure the physical challenges that come with these types of activities. For those individuals, a new activity has become quite popular: e-biking.  

 E-bikes, or electric bikes, are road or mountain bikes that come equipped with a battery-powered motor and fully operational pedals. There are three basic categories of e-bikes:

Class 1

  • e-bikes are low-speed, pedal-assisted e-bikes, meaning the rider must pedal in order to use the motor. When the rider begins to pedal, the motor kicks in to make the cycling easier. The motor on a Class 1 e-bike provides assistance up to a maximum speed of 20 mph, or miles per hour. 

Class 2

  • e-bikes also have fully functioning pedals, however they come with a motor controlled by a throttle, which allows the e-bike to be powered without pedaling. Class 2 e-bikes likewise provide motor assistance up to 20 mph. 

Class 3

  • e-bikes are also pedal-assisted e-bikes, similar to Class 1, but they can reach a maximum of 28 mph. Given the increased maximum speed, Class 3 e-bikes come equipped with a speedometer and require the use of a properly fitted and fastened helmet. Individuals under the age of 16 are allowed to operate Class 1 and Class 2 but not Class 3 e-bikes. 

 An e-bike rider does not need a driver’s license, registration or a license plate but must abide by all existing traffic laws. Unless prohibited by a local ordinance or regulation, Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes can be used on any paved surface where a regular bike is allowed to operate. However, Class 3 e-bikes are prohibited on bicycle paths and trails, in bicycle lanes, on equestrian trails and on hiking/recreational trails unless specifically allowed by local authorities.  

An e-bike motor offers a user the opportunity to experience the thrill of high-speed cycling without the accompanying physical exhaustion, but it is important for users to understand and appreciate the dangers that present themselves when inexperienced riders become too confident, too quickly. A 2019 study, conducted by researchers at New York University’s School of Medicine and published in the journal Injury Prevention, analyzed a national database of emergency room visits, seeking information about accidents involving standard bicycles, motorized scooters, and e-bikes from 2000 to 2017. The alarming revelation from the study was that e-bike injuries were generally the most severe and likely to require hospitalization compared to standard bicycles and motorized scooters. 

Charles DiMaggio, Ph.D., an injury epidemiologist who led this study, presumes that speed likely played a role in the more severe injuries related to e-bikes. E-bikes allow operators to reach significantly higher speeds than most individuals would ever reach on a traditional bicycle. Since riders have likely never traveled as fast as they would on an e-bike, they are likely not prepared for potential dangers associated with such high speeds, which can include the need to brake suddenly for cars, pedestrians or other cyclists. According to Dr. DiMaggio, “We know that increased speed often results in more-severe injuries.”

So what can riders do to stay safe on e-bikes? Of course, e-bikers should obey all applicable traffic laws which are designed to keep those on the road safe. E-bikers should always be vigilant of their surroundings, including weather conditions, road conditions, pedestrians, vehicles on the road and other cyclists. Riders should maintain a safe speed, which means not always reaching the maximum speed allowed by the particular e-bike being used. E-bikers should err on the side of caution and wear helmets, even though that might not be required. They should consider wearing brightly colored clothing, which makes them more visible to others on the road. Riders should use a bell when passing other cyclists or pedestrians to ensure that their presence is known.

Riders should familiarize themselves with their e-bikes before jumping onto the road with full confidence. Users should take their time, perhaps practicing in an empty parking lot before venturing onto a busy road at a high speed. Riders should become familiar with the different pedal-assist settings that many e-bikes have. E-bikes can accelerate rapidly, which can be dangerous for riders not used to sudden momentum changes. Using a lower pedal-assist setting could help users adjust to the e-bike’s increased acceleration. E-bikers should practice braking from high and low speeds, which may also be a new experience for those accustomed to traditional bicycles. And finally, if riders plan to ride where others are present, they should wear a face mask to protect both themselves and those around them. 

read more

Dolan Law Firm Statement Against Rise of Violent Hate Crimes Aimed at the AAPI Communities

Dolan Law Firm is appalled by the increasing displays of violence and hate targeting Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI), including the shootings in Atlanta which left eight dead, six of which were AAPI women, as well as the vicious attacks on elderly AAPI in the SF Bay Area over the last few weeks. Our deepest sympathies go out to the friends and family of the victims of these horrifying acts of violence.

Hate crime incidents against the AAPI community- particularly towards women – have increased to 150% in 2020 according to a report by Stop AAPI Hate, yet rarely are the perpetrators held accountable or charged appropriately for their crimes.
Dolan Law Firm’s Senior Associate Attorney and Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Director Mari Bandoma Callado said,

“I am outraged because the media has failed to call hate crimes for what they are and institutions rationalize racism and misogyny as a ‘bad day’. Discrimination and violence against the AAPI community are not new but the racialization of COVID-19 has inflamed anti-AAPI sentiments and contributed to a surge in anti-Asian hate crimes.” 

Dolan Law Firm is committed to fighting against hatred and injustice. Mari is the President of the Filipino Bar Association of Northern California and serves as a co-chair of the Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Bay Area’s Civil Rights Committee (AABA-Bay). Chris Dolan, Mari Bandoma Callado and other Dolan Law Firm attorneys have represented victims of discrimination and hate-based incidents and are actively pursuing a case against Nike for discriminating against members of the AAPI community.

The Dolan Law Firm urges our statewide community to self-educate and support our AAPI brothers and sisters. The following is a list of resources we have compiled and distributed to our own staff in an effort to recommit ourselves to the fight for racial justice every single day: 

Education and Action Resources:

If you feel you have been a victim of a hate crime, contact an attorney immediately to better understand your rights. Dolan Law Firm is committed to representing victims of hate crimes, harassment and discrimination that are members of the AAPI community and other marginalized communities statewide. 

read more

Chris Dolan Awarded California Lawyer CLAY Award

Thank you, California Lawyer, for this honor. On December 2, 2016, there was a music and art event in an old warehouse in Oakland. This “artist colony” was an unpermitted space where people were living, and “happenings” took place. About 50-60 people were present when, at around 11:20 p.m., a fire broke out. The building, filled with pianos, wood carvings, tapestries and other combustibles rapidly fed the hungry fire and 36 bright, young, promising free spirited souls were overcome with toxic smoke, couldn’t find their way out through the unlit and unmarked exits, and died in what has become known as the “Ghostship fire.”

Many of the finest lawyers throughout California, who were approached for representation, said there was no way to hold the City of Oakland and PG&E accountable, and turned these cases down. We were undeterred and willing to take on the fight even if they said we couldn’t win. These 36 young adults at the threshold of their lives, along with their grieving families, called out for justice and accountability and we took that call.

This case required all my life experience, education, and decades of “figuring it out.” As a young man, I worked dirty, hot, tiring jobs in construction to fund my studies. As a young lawyer, I renovated two old San Francisco buildings including our Market Street headquarters, learning about electrical systems, transformers, voltage drop, metering, and building/electric  codes involved in old buildings. So much of what I bring to the table is practical knowledge. Mary Alexander and I literally dug through the rubble and I used “old school” methods to understand and map out the faulty electrical services. Using my Georgetown Law degree, I “went into the rabbit hole” for 2 solid weeks and researched the s#!t out of the Oakland Municipal Code, State Fire Code, and CPUC regulations to develop the Complaint against the City and PG&E with Bob Bale. Tom Brandi and Brian Malloy used their decades of public entity law knowledge to doggedly drive the case against the City with several arduous, but successful, trips to the court of appeals.

Mary, Bob, Brendan Way, and I relentlessly pursued PG&E through multiple depositions, and a mountain of documents. Eventually, we found a few key documents, with a few critical sentences, to support our allegations that PG&E had violated the CPUC regulations and knew that multiple businesses were drawing too much power through one meter, making the piecework, often un-permitted, electrical system a tragedy waiting to happen.
I was able to focus our energies, using my practical knowledge, to pull these facts from the ashes and build a case with these great lawyers, and many others, including Bobby Thompson, Sophia Acherman, Jennifer Fiore, and Sandra Ribera-Speed. The Executive Committee, Mary, Tom, Bob, Bobby, and I, never considered defeat an option and, in the end, we honored these 36 beautiful lives, and their families, through accountability. We did what they said couldn’t be done. As Margaret Mead said, ‘Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.

read more

Amazon Product Liability

Written By: Christopher B. Dolan

This week I will discuss an important case I’m working on seeking to hold one of the world’s largest, most powerful corporations responsible for injuries caused by products they sell to consumers: Amazon.  

As we have seen in our communities, what online shopping had not yet brought down, the pandemic dealt a death blow. There to fill the vacuum, as both sinner and savior, was Amazon — keeping goods flowing while getting us all hooked on the dopamine fueled search for bargains and next day delivery.

I studied economics and business in my undergraduate and master’s degrees before studying law. There I learned about the multiplier effect: an initial injection into the economy causing a bigger overall increase in national income. The idea is if the government injects, say for example, 1 trillion dollars into the economy, this will lead to a 1.2 trillion dollar increase in national income. People will have more money to spend (whether through unemployment or by their employers re-opening/staying afloat) and demand for goods will go up, leading to more people being hired and more money being spent on things like transportation of goods, retail rents, clothes, furniture, phones, cars, Starbucks, etc. and the cycle repeats.  

Amazon is causing the liquefaction of the foundations of the retail economy with retail workers, transportation workers, parking attendants, janitors, and every related service falling into an abyss. (Think Kmart, Sears, JCPenney, Toys “R” Us.) Money previously injected into local economies is now mainlined into the corporate juggernaut, Amazon, in Seattle. Sure, it creates some jobs but the direct shipment from manufacturers to customer’s results in a net loss of jobs. The money going to Amazon, because of automation and direct shipping, leads to a much lower multiplier effect. The money goes to higher salaries for management and inestimable wealth for Jeff Bezos. How many cups of coffee, cars, planes, clothes and haircuts can one man have? So that money doesn’t multiply through the workforce as before, it consolidates into the ever more exclusive 1% of the 1%.

So what does this have to do with me? I took a case of first impression, not based on its size or value, but based on its potential to protect hundreds of millions of consumers and change the law forever — a case involving a defective hoverboard, purchased on Amazon, which burst into flames on December 31, 2015, burning my client and her home. The cause of the fire was defective lithium-ion batteries. The Chinese manufacturer went out of business as did the U.S distributor. The only one left in the chain of distribution was Amazon. I brought suit on behalf of my client based on a body of law known as “strict product liability,” which holds anyone in the chain of distribution, from manufacturer through the retailer, liable for the injuries caused by dangerous products. The rationale is that they are profiting from the sale, and are in a better position than a consumer to bear or pass along the costs associated with defective products through the purchasing insurance, or increasing the cost of each product a few cents. This is preferable than an individual consumer bearing all of the costs associated with a defective product. In catastrophic cases when a consumer has no health insurance or savings we, the taxpayers, often pay for their medical care and, through Social Security or other programs, their food, clothing and shelter. We end up subsidizing the sale of defective products.

Amazon contends that it is not in the chain of distribution, it just is an electronic platform where buyers and sellers interact with each other, they don’t “sell anything” and, therefore, they should not be held liable for the damages caused by defective products sold through Amazon. I was able to depose Amazon executives and obtain internal corporate documents that showed they charge a listing fee, control the listing content, get a flat fee per-unit-sold, collect the money, process rebates and refunds under their A-Z guarantee, and in the case of the hoverboard, take a 15% cut of the total sale. A trial court sided with Amazon saying that they couldn’t be held liable as a seller and I appealed.

My argument is that they are instrumental in the products being chosen, purchased and delivered, while making a substantial profit. It makes no sense to say that Amazon shouldn’t have the same legal obligation as the very brick-and-mortar stores that Amazon put out of business. Amazon is the 21st century retailer. Their market dominance allows them to put pressure on the manufacturers to make safe products and buy insurance. Strict liability would incentivize Amazon to stop selling dangerous products and purchase insurance with some of their profit so the innocent and unsuspecting consumer (their customer) isn’t left devastated and destitute.

I expect a ruling from the Court of Appeals in the next month. Keep your fingers crossed that the law will, once again, work to equalize the balance of power and hold Corporate America accountable.

read more

Cyclist Deaths Remain High During COVID-19

Written By: Christopher B. Dolan and Cristina Garcia

This week’s question comes from Wendy L. in Hayes Valley who asks: I am an avid bicyclist and enjoy taking leisurely rides through the City. Since San Francisco has enforced lockdowns due to COVID-19, traffic has decreased and downtown areas feel like ghost towns. However, I read news reports stating that despite the decrease in traffic, the number of cyclists’ deaths remains alarmingly high. I would have expected the number of cyclists’ deaths to decrease as fewer cars are on the roadways. If this is true, what are some of the reasons that bicyclists continue to die at high rates?

Dear Wendy: Thank you for your question. You are correct. Although traffic has significantly decreased since the stay-at-home orders were issued, bicyclists’ deaths remain alarmingly high. According to data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 2018 was the deadliest year for bicyclists since 1990, with 857 bicyclists’ deaths. In 2019, there was a slight improvement, but the number of fatalities remained at a high 846 bicyclists’ deaths. Due to the disturbingly large number of bicyclists’ deaths in 2020, the magazine Outside committed to tracking every bicyclist death caused by a vehicle collision.

Outside partnered with the nonprofit BikeMaps.org (“BikeMaps”), founded by Trisalyn Nelson, a professor in geographic information science at the University of California, Santa Barbara. BikeMaps has been collecting crowdsourced information about cyclist involved vehicle collisions and traffic hazards such as potholes and road construction in the United States since 2014. Outside and BikeMaps found that in 2020, there were 697 bicyclists who were killed in car crashes. Although this is a decrease from 2018 and 2019, the number of deaths is concerning because it remained incredibly high despite the COVID-19 lockdowns.

According to Outside and BikeMaps, factors contributing to the high rate of bicyclists’ deaths include poorly designed roads, high speed limits, and distracted drivers. For example, they found that the most dangerous road for a cyclist is what Outside and BikeMaps define as an “Arterial Road.” An Arterial road is a busy, multilane street, with traffic signals at intersections and speed limits exceeding 30 miles per hour. Arterial roads account for 65% of the fatal crashes per the data collected and analyzed by Outside and BikeMaps. BikeMaps also noted that cars making unprotected left turns (those with no dedicated left-turn light) are especially dangerous to cyclists and pedestrians because the driver is concerned with oncoming traffic and is not looking out for cyclists or pedestrians.

Another reason for the high number of bicyclists’ deaths in 2020 is that there has been a surge in bicycle sales, which translates to more cyclists on the road. Due to the pandemic, a significant number of people have turned to riding bicycles in order to avoid public transportation and to exercise safely. The NPD Group, Inc., one of the largest market research companies that monitors consumer purchase data, reported that in April of 2020, the cycling industry reported a growth in sales of 75%, generating an unprecedented $1 billion for the month. This surge continued throughout the year. NPD reported that from January through November of 2020, $4.9 billion worth of bikes were sold in the United States. Strava, a popular activity tracking application used by cyclists, reported a 179% increase in membership, further affirming the increasing number of people riding bikes. So, even though there is less traffic, the high number of deaths is impacted by the fact that there are more cyclists on the road.

 Based on the data collected by Outside and BikeMaps, fewer cars on the roads does not mean fewer bicycle collisions. For that reason, we encourage all bicycle riders to wear helmets and continue to exercise and bicycle safety.

If you were injured in a bicycle accident as a result of someone’s negligence, you have the right to seek compensation for your economic and non-economic damages. Economic damages include items such as property damage, medical bills, and lost wages; non-economic damages are commonly known as pain and suffering, physical impairment, and inconvenience. It is important to retain a skilled trial attorney to ensure that you receive full and just compensation for your injuries.

read more