New Legislation Encourages Bicycle Safety

Weekly Articles | On-The-Go

Written By Christopher B. Dolan and Emile A. Davis

This week’s question comes from Danielle T. from San Francisco:

I am a San Francisco resident and bicycle commuter. I ride to work daily and find it frustrating and unsafe to stop at a four way stop when it is clear for me to proceed. Often, when multiple cars are at the intersection, I feel I am slowing things down waiting my turn, and I have to rely on drivers seeing me and “allowing” me to take my turn in order to be safe. I don’t need the hassle of a ticket or people yelling, so I follow the law and stop, even though I am putting myself at risk. I think bicyclists should follow traffic laws, but there should be exceptions, or different rules for cyclists where it makes sense. Are there any changes coming? How can I help push for this type of change? 

Thank you for your thoughtful question, Danielle. As a cyclist myself, I share your concerns and observations that better rules which recognize the way cyclists use the road, particularly as it relates to bicyclists at stop signs. There is a potential solution on the horizon in California. The Safety Stop Bill (AB 122) has made its way through the legislature and is waiting for Governor Newsom to sign.

The Safety Stop Bill would change the requirements of cyclists at a stop sign. It would be lawful for a cyclist to treat a stop sign as yield sign, allowing them to proceed through so long as the intersection is clear. However, if other vehicles are at the intersection, or a pedestrian is in the process of crossing, bike riders must yield the right-of-way. 

California is not the first state to consider this type of law. Idaho was first, adopting a law in 1982 that allowed cyclists to treat a stop sign as a yield sign, and a red light as a stop sign. This “Idaho Stop” stood alone for many years until other states began to see the wisdom of adopting commonsense changes to the vehicle code to appropriately treat the different issues that cyclists bring to the roadway. More recently, Washington, Oregon and Colorado have adopted similar legislation allowing cyclists to proceed through stop signs when it is safe to do so. 

Legislation of this type is often met with a knee-jerk negative reaction from non-cyclists who are not used to the dangers and difficulties cyclists must interact with regularly. There are many reasons that laws of this type, and AB 122 in particular, are grounded in sound policy. Safety may be the most important reason. Studies have shown that where these types of laws go into effect, the rates of bicycle related accidents decrease. These laws just work. Cyclists have a clear view of the intersection without obstruction and, by necessity, have a keen awareness of the proximity of other vehicles. The bill would also conform the law to what is common practice which encourages respect for the law in general. This would have the added benefit of minimizing inequitable enforcement of laws and minimize pretextual stops of minorities for what is common behavior by all. A law of this type would bring us into conformity with our Pacific neighbors, Washington and Oregon, which have already enacted this type of law. 

It is no surprise that this law is supported by the local bicycle coalitions including, Bike East Bay, the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, and the Marin Bicycle Coalition. Getting involved with these types of organizations is a good way to help be part of an organized push for cycle friendly legislation. Here, at the Dolan Law Firm, we have a long history of support of these organizations and the work they do on behalf of cyclists. 

 

read more

Rice v. City of Roy: A Police Shooting Incident Case

A federal jury rules unanimously in favor of Chris Dolan’s clients and finds excessive use of force used by police officer Chris Johnson. A verdict of $3, 257,000.00 was awarded to plaintiffs, in Federal Court, Tacoma Washington, and against Chris Johnson and the city of Roy on September 23, 2021. This case arises from a police officer involved shooting just south of the Roy Washington city limits in February of 2019.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

UNANIMOUS JURY HOLD ROY WASHINGTON POLICE OFFICER LIABLE FOR EXCESSIVE FORCE IN POLICE SHOOTING CASE

On September 23, 2021, a Federal Jury, In Tacoma, Washington, unanimously found that City of Roy Police Officer, Christopher Johnson, violated the Fourth Amendment rights of David Rice and Seth Donahue, when he shot them as they were traveling, unarmed, in their UTV on the BNR rail tracks inside the City of Roy, a rural city of less than 1,000 inhabitants covering .49 square miles. Roy has a police force of 2, one being the defendant, Christopher Johnson. The total verdict was $3,257,000.00.

FACTS:

February 9th, 2019, was a snowy day in Roy, located in Pierce County, Washington, about 60 miles outside of Seattle. Rice and his nephew, Donahue, had been out in their RZR UTV enjoying the 10-12 inches of snow traveling along trails, rail tracks and “tearing it up” through the city streets in Roy.  Admittedly, they had been drinking beer (ten and 13 beers respectively over 6 hours) that afternoon and evening. Officer Johnson alleged that Rice, driving the UTV, committed various traffic infractions and that he tried to pull the UTV over in town claiming that he activated his lights and siren, and that Rice and Donahue took off on the railroad tracks to evade him. Rice and Donahue stated they were unaware of Johnson’s pursuit, and it was shown that the rail tracks are a commonly used UTV trails. Home surveillance video, located nearby, peripherally caught the shooting on tape.  Dolan argued that “Johnson’s ego, being bruised, let him to turn off his lights and siren and race ahead to try and cut-off Rice and Donahue on the tracks at 295th St.  As Johnson approached perpendicular to the tracks, he turned off all the lights on his car “going dark” as the UTV approached.  Johnson then quickly drove the police vehicle towards the tracks, turned on only his spotlight, shined it down the tracks towards Rice, and ran from his police car, weapon drawn, towards the UTV.  Jonson admitted that he placed himself on the tracks, directly into the path of the approaching UTV and when the UTV didn’t stop, fired two shots into the front windshield and then two more into the passenger window as the UTV went by “fearing for his life.”  Johnson was hit by the UTV before firing.  Rice and Donahue testified that they were blinded by the spotlight, did not associate it with a police officer, and did not see Johnson until he shot them. Rice was struck on the right shoulder, with the bullet traveling into his chest, and also in the groin where the bullet passed through and exited his left leg. Donahue was shot in the right hand.   Dolan used accident constructionists, police procedures and ballistics experts as well as the Chief of the Roy Police Department (the other half of the 2 sworn officers) and Johnson himself, to show that he violated Roy’s Use of Force and Police Pursuit Policies and engaged in an excessive use of force.  Dolan and Jessup also prevailed on a Monelll Claim demonstrating the Chief and Mayor of Roy ratified Johnson’s conduct by failing to engage in an officer involved shooting inquiry and engaging in a disciplinary review of Johnson’s conduct and maintaining him on the force.

Dolan said “finally the tide is turning against police abuse. And justice under the 4th Amendment is being secured for those victimized by abuses of police powers. There is not an increase of police abuse, there is an increase in civil prosecution of these cases largely fueled and supported by modern day evidence generated by cell phones and private surveillance cameras.”

David Rice stated “I thank the jurors for their time and honesty and their courage to hold the police accountable. Their decision vindicates me and my nephew: we were out just having fun in the snow, we didn’t threaten anyone, hurt anyone, and were just about home when he ambushes us and shot us.  I’m a hunter and you couldn’t even shoot a deer this way without it being a crime.  The City of Roy has lied about what happened to the press through their press releases. The Jury saw through those lies.  The City of Roy needs to act to remove Johnson and he should be criminally prosecuted for his excessive use of force and abuse of power.”

Seth Donahue stated “I have been afraid of the Roy Police since the day this happened. They painted us out to be criminals when it was Officer Johnson who broke the law. We are good people who were having fun on a snowy night on rural roads, we didn’t know Johnson was supposedly chasing us and he came out of nowhere and opened fire. They need to take him off the street and take his gun and badge. Before he kills someone else.”

Further information may be obtained by contacting Chris Dolan at 415-279-2604 or Local Counsel, Doug Cloud at 253-921-1505

read more

You too, Us too: The Strength in Numbers

Written By Christopher B. Dolan and Vanessa C. Deniston

This week’s question comes from Fatima in the Bay Area:

I am a woman of color working at a big tech company in the Bay Area. I have been stuck in the same position for nearly seven years, while several of my white, male co-workers and even subordinates have been given opportunities for advancement. I’m worried my supervisor doesn’t consider me a serious candidate for a promotion, despite my excellent performance reviews. When there is a menial task to get done, it always seems to be assigned to me. At company events, my supervisor introduces me by first name only to corporate representatives, though he introduces the male members of my team using their full names. In meetings, I am frequently interrupted by male team members when I am trying to share feedback or ideas. I am hesitant to approach HR about this. I feel I will be told I have no proof and I am just imagining things. I’ve heard rumors that women in other departments have had similar experiences, but I’m not sure who they are and I’m too worried about my job security to go asking questions. Do I have any options here? 

Thank you for your question, Fatima. Let me assure you that you are not alone in your experiences. What you have described, a mixture gender and potentially race-based discrimination and microaggressions, is being experienced on a grand scale throughout the tech industry by women. Men continue to outnumber women at every level and women are promoted at a lower rate than men, making up only about 38% of managers. While many companies couch themselves as “progressive” and profess to have inclusive diversity platforms, the disparities in the workplace between men and women and, disproportionately, women of color, persist.  

Most recently, a group of both current and former Apple employees dissatisfied with the internal responses to their complaints of harassment, discrimination and retaliation have banded together and called for a collective exchange of stories and experiences in the workplace, spurring the #AppleToo hashtag on social media. The group’s website urges its coworkers at every level to collectively call for systemic change in the workplace, stating that,

“when our stories are collected and presented together, they help expose persistent patterns of racism, sexism, inequity, discrimination, intimidation, suppression, coercion, abuse, unfair punishment, and unchecked privilege.” 

In circumstances such as yours, Fatima, there are several actions you can take to both protect yourself and connect with other women and/or persons of color with similar experiences. First, it is essential to document any incidences or circumstances you feel could be related to gender or race discrimination, including discussions with your boss regarding your interest in advancement opportunities and his response, instances of microaggressions and/or evidence of disparate treatment in the workplace. If possible, your written record should be created contemporaneously with the incidences they document and be marked with a date and time stamp. Contemporaneous records, especially those bearing a date and time stamp, are afforded more credibility than ones created after the employee suffers a termination or a disciplinary meeting. Your description should include the date, time, setting, potential witnesses involved and what was said. Be a meticulous historian and leave emotion out of it, if possible. Always assume an outsider, with no knowledge of you, your character, or your performance record, may someday be reading and evaluating your account of what occurred. While you can certainly share how the experience made you feel, resist the urge to vent. 

The second step you can take is keeping your eye out for allies and sharing your experiences with them in a safe environment outside the workplace. It may feel intimidating to ask other women or persons of color if they, too, feel discriminated against or marginalized in the workplace. Therefore, it is often easier to share your own experiences with them first. If they have faced something similar, they are more likely to feel comfortable volunteering it on their own terms than they would if you questioned them about it directly. If they do end up sharing similar experiences, approaching human resources together can be a powerful approach. It is easier to dismiss one employee’s experience as an outlier, than it is to dismiss two or three similar ones, especially where the reporting structure is shared. 

Nonetheless, if you find you are your only reliable witness, go to HR and report your concerns, preferably in writing. Do not operate under the assumption your concerns will be dismissed. Even if they are, it is unlawful for your company to retaliate against you for voicing your complaints about suspected gender and/or race discrimination. Your company has a vested interest in responding to discrimination claims appropriately, as a failure to investigate, only increases their liability. As always, documenting all communications you have with your supervisor and HR is an important tool to keep track of what has occurred and protect yourself should retaliation occur after filing an informal or formal complaint.

If you feel you are being harassed, discriminated against, or retaliated against because of your race or gender, contact an attorney that specializes in employment law. Making real, transformative change in the struggle against institutionalized implicit bias and overt bias, takes courage and numbers. The good news is the tech industry does not lack either.

read more

Nursing Home Nightmare: Sexual Abuse in Care Facilities

Written By Christopher Dolan and Cristina Garcia

This week’s question comes from David K. in San Francisco:

My older sister, Lucy, is forty-one years old and suffers from physical and mental impairments. She uses a wheelchair and has trouble communicating. A couple of years ago, my parents and I made the tough decision to place her in a nursing home, as my parents could no longer care for her. We researched the facility, and it appeared to be a well-equipped facility for my sister’s needs. I would visit my sister on the weekends. I observed a male resident who seemed friendly and often engaged in conversation with Lucy during my visits. At the time, I thought it was nice for Lucy to have a friend in the facility. However, this all changed during one of my visits when I found this male resident in her room. They were by themselves, and he was lying in bed with her, which I found completely inappropriate. I immediately asked him to leave. I then spoke to one of the nurses and notified her of the incident. She apologized and assured me it wouldn’t happen again. Lucy’s nurse also stated that this male resident had exhibited inappropriate sexual behavior to other female residents. When I heard this, I was utterly disgusted. I have seen news stories about health providers who have sexually or physically abused residents. However, I am not sure what to do in this situation as the person abusing Lucy was another resident. Can the facility be held accountable for the other resident’s behavior, as they previously knew about his sexual tendencies?

David, it is terrible that you and your family had to go through this experience. As you mentioned, many news stories discuss physical or sexual abuse by health providers. However, it is the nursing home’s responsibility to ensure the safety of all residents, not only from health providers but also from other residents. 

Under the Elder and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (“EADACPA”), codified as Welfare and Institutions Code Section 15600 et sec. A “Dependent Adult” is defined as “any person between the ages of 18 and 64 who resides in this state and who has physical or mental limitations that restrict his or her ability to carry out normal activities or to protect his or her rights, including, but not limited to, persons who have physical or developmental disabilities, or who physical or mental abilities have diminished because of age.” Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15610.23(a). The law further defines “dependent adult” to include any person between the ages of 18 and 64 years who is admitted as an inpatient to a 24-hour health facility. Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15610.23(b). 

Based on the information you have provided, it appears that Lucy is a dependent adult who relied on the nursing home staff to protect her from harm. Under Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code Section 15610.57, “Neglect” includes the “failure to protect from health and safety hazards.”

Furthermore, “Abuse” is defined as “the 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.”  The nursing facility was negligent in the care of Lucy because they failed to protect her from health and safety hazards. Despite having knowledge that the male resident had sexual tendencies, the facility did not properly monitor the resident and allowed him to continue interacting with female residents without supervision. In addition, the facility’s conduct would fall under “abuse” as defined by the EADACPA because a reasonable person in a like position would not allow the male resident to interact with Lucy without supervision and should not have allowed them to be alone in her room. Once the facility became aware of the sexual tendencies of the male resident, they should have taken precautionary measures, including monitoring his behavior and whereabouts to ensure he was not left alone with other residents he could harm.

read more

Dolan Law Firm Wishes You a Safe Labor Day Weekend

Written By: Mari Bandoma Callado, Senior Associate Attorney and Director, DE&I

Dolan Law Firm hopes you and your family have a wonderful and safe Labor Day Weekend. To help you safely enjoy the end of the summer, we put together these safety tips:

Social Gatherings

Over the course of the last 18 months or so, we learned that social gatherings may lead to the spread of COVID-19. With hospitalizations and deaths due to the highly contagious delta variant of COVID-19, we encourage you to stay vigilant. 

If you are attending a social gathering this holiday weekend please avoid being in a crowd and poorly ventilated spaces as much as possible, try to maintain a physical distance of 6 feet, wash your hands often, and wear a mask when outside your home, in public, and around others. If you are feeling sick or have been exposed to someone with COVID-19, we urge you to stay home.
Click here for more information on safely gathering and here on how to protect yourself and others. If you are not yet received the COVID-19 vaccine but are interested in learning more, click here.

Drive Safely

If you are going on a road trip or just driving around town this weekend, please drive safely. The National Safety Council estimates approximately 390 deaths and another 44,400 serious injuries over Labor Day weekend this year. Please wear your seatbelt, don’t drink and drive (designate a driver instead), and maintain a safe speed.
For more safety tips while driving, click here.

Swim and Boat Safely

If you are heading to the beach or the pool this weekend, please be cautious. Do not swim alone (in case you become incapacitated). If you are swimming with children, designate a responsible adult to supervise children at all times as they swim or play by the water. If you are going to the lake or a river, please wear a life jacket.
For more swimming safety tips click here.

If you will be on a boat, please do not underestimate the dangers of the water. According to the U.S. Coast Guard, most boating accidents occur because of excessive speed, lack of experience, and distractions. Do not drink and boat. It is against the law in California to operate a boat or water ski with a blood concentration (BAC) of 0.08%.
For more boating safety tips click here.

read more

Jury Duty during COVID-19

Written By Christopher Dolan and Lourdes De Armas

This week’s question comes from James P. in Daly City: I recently received a Jury Duty Summons. With everything that is going, do I still need to serve on a Jury? Should I ignore it?

Thank you for your question James. 

It is true that many courtrooms have begun hearing jury trials, but many courts are prioritizing criminal cases. The Los Angeles Courts have been focusing on the 7000 criminal cases that are currently backlogged, according to Presiding Judge Eric Taylor.

This is pushing aside civil cases leaving many victims anxiously waiting for their personal injury trial. The delayed cases include:

  • people badly injured in car accidents,
  • medical malpractice,
  • workplace accidents,
  • sexual assault and
  • workplace harassment

The delays are primarily attributable to the pandemic shutdown of 2020. The apparent second surge of COVID-19 cases in various California counties are reinstating previous pandemic restrictions and quarantines. This trend may soon cascade to every county across the state and that could mean additional trial extensions that will continue to backlog all cases. This legal landscape is justifiably frightening to those awaiting verdicts.

There is another reason for delays that is plaguing every court across the state. So much that even criminal trials are being delayed. Jury trials whether criminal or civil are paralyzed without a key component: JURORS.

Within the past few months, courts from Sacramento to San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego had to delay trials because too few people responded to jury duty summonses. Across the state, the non-response rates are much higher now than they were before the pandemic.

San Francisco’s Superior Court gives potential jurors the option to report online or in person is experiencing an online trend. Just in July, in one case, out of 135 jurors instructed to report, 127 reported remotely and 8 people reported in person to the courthouse. Of the 8 people who showed up to court, half of them were dismissed, leaving just 4 in person prospective jurors for the trial.

A television station in San Diego recently reported that a criminal case had to be postponed last month because too few people showed up for jury duty. Officials twice summoned 900 people, but only about 40 people showed up each time, KGTV reported.

“What the real question boils down to are people willing to show up to that court and sit in a jury trial?” said Bill Raftery, a senior analyst with the National Center for State Courts. “Many courts have been responsive to jurors who have said that they’re not comfortable with coming to court and doing jury duty and therefore offering deferrals simply because of concerns over COVID.” 

These shortages of jurors have created delays in criminal trials that infringes on the constitutional rights of many. The law says that individuals facing criminal charges are presumed innocent. For some defendants who have not been convicted and are awaiting their day in court, can’t make bail or are being held without bail, it is more time behind bars as a pretrial detainee.

What can you do if you receive a jury summons? Do not ignore it. You are needed. “Justice has not shut down. Justice has slowed down,” said Deborah Chang, president of the Consumer Attorneys of California.

There is currently a big impact on civil proceedings. Victims of personal injury are often disabled and maybe out of work because of some tragic incident and cannot wait months or years for a trial date or settlement. “It is devastating on the clients and the family who are desperate,” according to Chang. The side effects of these delays are devastating to victims who are in the weakest health. They may be clinging to life due to an injury in an accident, or perhaps a workplace exposure to a harmful substance. “It is so devastating to lose a plaintiff before they reach the trial date because they die. Sometimes the claim dies with them,” said Chang.

The system cannot function without you. Jury trials provide an opportunity for citizens to participate in the process of governing. Serving on a jury is the most direct and impactful way for citizens to connect to the constitution. Citizens can help perpetuate our system of laws and stabilize our democracy. 

Jurors perform a vital role in the American system of justice. The protection of our rights and liberties is largely achieved through the teamwork of judge and jury who, working together in a common effort, put into practice the principles of our legal system. In both civil and criminal cases, it is the jury’s duty to decide the facts in accordance with the principles of law and guided by the assigned judge. The decision is made on the evidence introduced, and the jury’s decision on the facts is usually final. 

Juries provide the perspective of the citizen to our developing body of law. Exercise your constitutional right to participate in a process that is a cornerstone of American democracy: the jury trial!

***

The COVID-19 (Coronavirus) outbreak is an ongoing, rapidly developing situation and the local, state, and federal responses are changing regularly. The Dolan Law Firm takes efforts to keep the information on this page updated, however, to guarantee up to date information it is necessary to confirm with publicly available federal, state and local health organization guidance and government mandates.

read more