Firm News | Dolan Law Firm

Accidents Involving Pedestrians are on the Rise

Written By Christopher Dolan and Jeremy Jessup

This week’s question comes from Jordan from Emeryville: As people have started to get out more, I keep hearing about pedestrians being struck by cars. I know this is nothing new but seems to be coming up a lot more lately. Do you know what the trend is, I hope I am just paranoid, and whether or not anyone is doing anything to address the issue, if there is one?

With the holiday season upon us, and despite the cold weather, people are out shopping and just being out more. With the current status of COVID-19, ridership on public transportation is still down, so those without vehicles, have taken to walking. But unfortunately, you are correct, though not a new problem, accidents involving pedestrians are on the rise. Earlier this year, the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) projected that 2020 had the largest ever annual increase in the rate at which drivers struck and killed pedestrians, and they were correct.

According to the GHSA the likely culprits are speeding, drunk driving, drugged driving, and distraction, which were rampant on U.S. roads during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the March GHSA report also examined the 2019 FARS data to provide insights on trends regarding these issues. Some of the findings include the following:

Pedestrians accounted for 17% of all traffic deaths in 2019, compared to 13% in 2010. While pedestrian deaths have risen by 46% over the past decade, the number of all other traffic deaths has increased by only 5%
Drivers struck and killed a larger proportion of pedestrians that were minorities, including Black, Indigenous and People of Color, than expected based on the population. On the other hand, white/non-Hispanic pedestrians accounted for a considerably smaller proportion based on population
Most pedestrians are killed on local roads, in the dark and away from intersections. During the past 10 years, the number of pedestrians struck and killed after dark increased by 54%, compared to a 16% rise in pedestrian fatalities in daylight
Alcohol impairment by the driver and/or pedestrian was reported in nearly half of traffic crashes that resulted in a pedestrian fatality
Although passenger cars make up the largest categories of vehicles involved in fatal pedestrian crashes, over the past decade the number of pedestrian deaths in crashes involving SUVs has increased at a faster rate – 69% – than deaths in crashes involving passenger cars, which increased by 46%.

“Last year was filled with so much death and loss as COVID swept across the country. As America gets vaccinated and returns to normal, we need to treat pedestrian safety like the public health emergency that it is,” said GHSA Executive Director Jonathan Adkins. “We must strengthen our efforts to protect those on foot from traffic violence by implementing equitable and proven countermeasures that protect people walking and address those driving behaviors that pose the greatest risk.”

However, given the wide-open roads that existed following the stay in place order, many drivers have failed to adjust to more people being out and about. “The wrecks that are occurring are at higher speeds,” said Dr. James Augustine, the medical director for emergency medical services in Atlanta, as well as a spokesman for the American College of Emergency Physicians.

To help with this issue, AB43 was introduced by State Assemblymember Laura Friedman out of Glendale, to assist cities struggling to combat pedestrian fatalities. Beginning in 2022, cities will be able to force drivers to slow down on accident-prone streets. AB43 gives cities new authority to reduce limits in increments of 5 mph by factoring the safety of pedestrians and cyclists in traffic surveys. The state’s existing standards set limits based upon certain findings determined by an engineering and traffic survey and on the speed drivers feel comfortable driving at, rather than what’s actually safe.

Unfortunately, while it should be the ultimate duty of drivers to pay attention and follow the rules of the road, pedestrians should be mindful of the hazards and follow a few basic tips:

Increase your visibility at night by carrying a flashlight when walking and wearing reflective clothing, such as reflective vests.
Cross streets at a designated crosswalk or intersection whenever possible.
Walk on a sidewalk or path instead of the road. Walk on the shoulder and facing traffic if a sidewalk or path is not available.
Avoid using electronic devices like earbuds or walking if you have been using alcohol or drugs. They can cause distractions and impair judgement and coordination.

Written By Christopher Dolan and Vanessa Deniston

This week’s question comes from Emily from the Bay Area:Recently, I took a rideshare home from a holiday party I attended in the city. During the party, I had several drinks and by the time I was ready to leave, I was not in a state to drive myself. I called a rideshare vehicle to take me home. During the ride, the driver asked me several personal questions that made me feel uncomfortable, specifically what kind of guys I was attracted to and if I had roommates or lived alone. When I first approached the car, the driver even encouraged me to sit in the front seat next to him, which I found odd. Luckily, I was not so drunk that I could not perceived these red flags. I ended up calling my friend who kept me company on the phone all the way home. Hypothetically, had the driver pulled over and tried to attack me, what legal recourse would I have and against whom?

We are so glad you arrived home safely, Emily. We hear this type of story frequently. It’s much more common than you would think. Rideshare services, like Uber and Lyft, can offer drunk partygoers a safer alternative to getting behind the wheel intoxicated, but all riders should still exercise caution, especially women riding alone. While most rideshare companies subject their drivers to criminal background checks, the system isn’t fail-proof as evidenced by the over 4,000 reported incidences of sexual assault to Lyft between 2017-2019 and nearly 6,000 reported to Uber within a similar timeframe.

The great majority of rideshare assault cases in California involve intoxicated female passengers riding alone with a male driver. Indeed, in such a circumstance the likelihood of an assault greatly increases. An intoxicated female passenger will not be as alert as she otherwise might be if she is sober, missing red flags. She is more likely to engage in seemingly friendly banter with the driver and divulge personal details she may not otherwise volunteer. She is also unlikely to have awareness of where she is and may not notice if the driver has deviated from the designated route to her ultimate destination. If the driver makes advances on her, she is unable to give consent and may have an impaired memory regarding what occurred and when. She is also likely to struggle with providing an accurate description of her perpetrator. It is important that all women and solo passengers traveling in a rideshare vehicle be aware of common troubling signs.

To address your question directly, Emily, if you are assaulted by a rideshare driver, you are likely to have claims both against the driver and the rideshare company the driver contracts with. In some isolated incidences, you may also have a claim against third parties, if that third party requested the ride on your behalf and you are an intoxicated minor. If you are assaulted during a ridesharing ride, or you believe you may have been assaulted, it should be reported immediately to both the police and the rideshare company. Take immediate action to preserve any receipts for your ride and take screenshots of any information within the app that may identify the date and time of the ride, the identity of the driver, the driver’s license plate number, and the route taken by the driver to your final destination. This information will significantly narrow down the pool of perpetrators and allow the police and the rideshare company to identify him more easily. Preserve all clothing you were wearing on the date of the assault and visit the ER to have a rape kit evaluation performed.

To the extent possible, avoiding such circumstances entirely is the key objective. There are several steps you can take to thwart or seriously deter opportunistic predators in such circumstances and you utilized some of them. Above all else, trust your instincts. If the behavior of the driver feels suspect or off to you, do not get in the car. Simply call another ride. If the driver exhibits concerning behaviors during the ride, cease further engagement with the driver and involve a third party. Call a friend to keep you company on the phone during the ride home or text someone you have regular contact with, reporting your whereabouts, when you should be home and the behaviors you perceive to be troubling. If the driver offers you food or drink after exhibiting troubling behaviors, politely decline. Many rideshare apps have integrated a section within their apps where you can report safety concerns. Understand, this is not, nor should it be, a substitute for calling 911. If the driver inadvertently cancels the ride and pulls over in an unfamiliar area, call the police immediately.

If you believe you may have been the victim of an assault, report it to the police immediately and contact an attorney to advise you of your rights. Your action may well prevent further assaults from occurring if the perpetrator is identified and suspended from the rideshare platform.

Written By Christopher B. Dolan

This week’s question comes from Frank T. in the Mission District: I got a jury summons in the mail. Why do I keep getting them? I don’t want to sit on a jury and take time away from work. My husband and I had a real hard time during COVID and taking time off work right now would be difficult.

Frank, I know this is a sentiment shared by many right now. The right to trial by a jury of one’s peers is enshrined in the Bill of Rights that was formed at the time of the birth of our Nation. When The Colonies were under British rule, citizens had no right to have members of their community decide their fate. Justice had become politicized, and it was administered pursuant to British law, and as a manner of repression, as the colonists were considered British subjects. British law was often unjust and unfair to the Colonists and failed to recognize the realities of living in the New World. This was one of the many injustices that spurned the birth of our Democracy. Trial by jury was, and largely remains, an American institution with most countries not offering jury trials to their citizens.

The right to trial by jury was established under and through the Seventh Amendment to the Bill of Rights. As such it was one of the original rights for which a war was fought, blood was spent, and lives were sacrificed. The right to trial by jury is also guaranteed by Section 16, of Article One, of the California Constitution.

What was once considered a fundamental right and honor is now perceived by many as an annoying and disruptive inconvenience. Not to minimize the impact that you feel jury service has upon your personal circumstances, too many of us now take for granted our democratic freedoms, rights and responsibilities. Jury service is an apolitical right and in today’s environment where the courts have become more politicized, the fact that a jury pool is drawn from a broad cross-section of our community is perhaps one of the most apolitical aspects of our Democracy.

As your name, Frank, suggests that your pronoun is male, and you reference your spouse with the pronoun he, I deduce that you are in a same sex marriage. (If my assumption is incorrect, please forgive me.) I want to put this into some perspective: imagine if you or your husband were accused of a crime, were the victim of a hate crime, or been deprived a civil right based upon your sexual orientation. If you lived in another state, not as progressive as California, the judge might be an elected or appointed official who is homophobic, or against gay marriage, and she/he would be the sole decisionmaker on your case. That prejudice could very well affect the outcome of your case and be demoralizing. Likewise, were no members of the LGBTQ community to heed the call to jury service, you would not receive a jury of your peers.

No one knows the case you have been summoned for as of now. Jurors are randomly selected from DMV records, voting rolls and other public sources of information and, until the day you show up at the courthouse, there is no way to know what type of trial, or what type of issue, is involved. In San Francisco, if you are summoned to 400 McAllister Street chances are that it is a civil trial involving disputes between two parties, two businesses, or an individual seeking justice against much more powerful interests such as corporations and/or the government. If you are summoned to 850 Bryant Street, it is most likely a criminal case.

Since COVID-19 began, I have tried two cases to verdict, one in September against a police department and officer where there was a claim of unlawful and excessive use of force resulting in a shooting and one against an insurance company for injuries suffered in a collision. I selected juries, presented the facts, and received verdicts in favor of my clients who otherwise would never have received justice. Had jurors not shown up, my clients would never have had their chance to receive fair and impartial justice. We would never have been able to stand up to the police and, quite possibly, given the judge and venue in another state, we would not even have had a chance, much less won.

The right to trial by jury is already threatened by big monied interests that don’t want trial lawyers like me to balance the power dynamics. Organizations which I am proud to be a member of, such as the American Association of Justice, and the Consumer Attorneys of California, fight diligently and spend millions of dollars annually, contributed by members such as myself who believe in this right, to help elect pro-justice, pro-civil rights and pro-7th Amendment legislators to help preserve the right to trial by jury.

Many jurors, originally reluctant, after serving their jury service are glad they did it. They feel proud of being a group of twelve (or six in Federal Court) who participated. I hope you take the call to service and have a meaningful experience. Lastly, just because you are called for jury duty doesn’t mean you will serve. Many times, jurors are not needed as a case gets resolved or settled. Even if you are called into court, most jurors do not get selected, as often more jurors are called then end up being needed.

I hope this helps you see things in a different light. Without Jurors, the light of democracy dims remarkably.

Written By Christopher B. Dolan and Kim E. Levy

This week’s question comes from Linda R. from Oakland: I’ve been hearing a lot about new laws that have been passed in the last several months in California. Can you tell me about laws that could benefit families with children?

Thank you for asking, Linda. There has been a wave of new legislation passed in California this year geared towards helping families and rounding out public education. Here are some of the highlights promoting diversity, equity, inclusion, and family values in California.

California Comeback Plan

Governor Newsom’s California Comeback Plan makes enormous investments into early childhood education by providing universal transitional kindergarten education by 2025 with implementation in some school districts as early as Fall 2022. Specifically, the program provides free, high-quality, pre-kindergarten for all four-year-old children in California. The plan also increases the amount of supervision provided to children by reducing class sizes and cutting adult-to-child ratios in half with at least an average of 1 adult for every 12 children, down from 1 for every 24 children. The plan also provides $1,500 to 3.7 million low-income students as seed money for college savings accounts.

Expanded Family Leave

On September 27, 2021, AB1033, a bill expanding the California Family Rights Act was signed into law. Under this law, employers must provide eligible employees up to 12 weeks of job-protected leave from work, on an annual basis, to care for a parent-in-law with a serious medical condition. This law will provide new protections and greater flexibility for employees that must care for their aging in-laws, and is clearly beneficial to families struggling finding adequate care for a family member and/or struggling financially with affording outside care for a family member.

Parent Healthcare Act

Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act under President Obama allowing children to remain on their parents’ insurance plans up to age 26, it is becoming more common for states to expand that coverage up to age 30 (Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, New Jersey). However, California has become the first state to expand coverage to allow adult children to include their dependent parents on their health insurance plans. To be eligible for this coverage, adults must rely on their child for at least 50% of their total support. Unfortunately, the law only applies to people who have purchased their insurance on the individual market. Those who have insurance through work are not eligible to add their parents to their plans. This law is meant to help increase healthcare access to adults living in the country illegally who are ineligible for Medicaid or Covered California plans. This law will take effect in 2023.

Teaching Mental Health

SBB 224 is an important bill requiring middle schools and high schools to incorporate mental health instruction into existing health education curriculum. Instructional content will include habits that promote mental wellness, hope to spot signs and symptoms of common mental health conditions, and how to seek help for mental health related conditions. The purpose of this bill is to help reduce stigma and start conversations around mental health in schools.

Ethnic Studies as High School Graduation Requirement

AB101, which goes into effect by the 2024-25 school year, will require that all California public high school students receive education in ethnic studies in order to graduate. Under this law, school districts may either develop their own lesson plans or use a model curriculum created by the state board of education. The importance and benefit of this law is self-evident and supported by significant research which has found that students perform better in school if they see themselves in the lesson being taught. In signing this bill into law, Governor Newsom said, “Ethnic studies courses enable students to learn their own stories, and those of their classmates, and a number of studies have shown that these courses boost student achievement over the long run – especially among students of color. I appreciate that the legislation provides a number of guardrails to ensure that courses will be free from bias or bigotry and appropriate for all students.”

Gender Neutral Toys

Last but not least, AB1084 mandates large department stores selling children’s products to provide a gender-neutral toy and childcare item section within the store. Stores that do not comply with the law will face fines of up to $500. While this bill will not radically alter the shopping experience, it represents a small step in a push toward greater change and inclusion.

Written by Mari Bandoma Callado and DE&I Committee

The Dolan Law Firm recognizes World Braille Day to raise awareness for blind and partially sighted people.

History

In December 2018, the United Nations General Assembly established World Braille Day to be observed annually on January 4 to raise the importance of Braille, which serves as a communication medium for blind and partially sighted people. The date marks the birth anniversary of Louis Braille, who at the age of 15, invented the tactile representation of alphabetic and numerical symbols using six dots to represent each letter and number, and even musical, mathematical, and scientific symbols.

Being Visually Impaired During the COVID-19 Pandemic

People with disabilities are less likely to access health care, education, participate in the community, and be employed even under normal circumstances. For the visually impaired, the COVID-19 Pandemic showed just how critical it is to produce essential information in accessible formats like Braille and other digital accessibility or audible formats. Otherwise, people with disabilities could face a higher risk of contamination due to the lack of access to guidelines to protect and reduce the spreading of the pandemic.

Workplace Accommodations

While the use of Braille appears to be declining in a literacy context, it remains a key tool in everyday life. Advocates note that one of the key advantages in understanding Braille is the connection between literacy and employability. In 2017, the American Foundation for the Blind found that blind or visually impaired people in the United States have an employment rate of 44.2 percent, which is 35 percentage points lower than the employment rate at the time for those without disabilities. Additionally, there’s an $11,000 wage gap between those who read Braille and those who don’t according to a 2015 article published in the Journal of Blindness, Innovation and Research. Accordingly, individuals who experience blindness or visual impairment are more likely to experience higher rates of poverty. Thus, it is critical for employers to increase accessibility and opportunities by providing accommodations for job applicants and employees.

Employers are required to provide job applicants and employees with disabilities “reasonable accommodations” that allow them equal opportunities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and/or the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Accommodations vary depending on the needs of the applicant or employee but here is a list of examples of adjustments or modifications that are often requested by individuals who are blind or visually impaired:

Assistive technology like scanners, magnifiers, digital records, screen reading software, refreshable braille displays, and braille embossers;
An accessible website that allows workers to access employee portals, message boards, employment handbooks etc.;
Modification of an employment test or training;
Providing written materials in an accessible format e.g. braille, large print, or audio;
Guide dogs; and
Flexible schedule or work from home option.

Requests for accommodations are “protected”, meaning that if they are made in good faith, a worker may not lawfully be retaliated against for making the request. The request should also start what is known as the “good faith interactive process.” That is a process where the employer and employee work together to find a solution that works for both of them. The employer is not required to offer the requested accommodation but must work with the employee to determine whether there is a potential accommodation that will allow the employee to perform the essential functions of their position without creating an undue hardship on the employer.

If you believe that you have been discriminated against because of your disability, or if you need help requesting reasonable accommodations, contact the Dolan Law Firm’s employment attorneys.

Additional Information and Resources for people with visual impairment:

National Library Service (NLS) is a free braille and talking book library service for people with temporary or permanent low vision, blindness, or a physical, perceptual, or reading disability that prevents them from using regular print materials. Note that digital braille and talking book titles can be downloaded from the NLS BARD (Braille and Audio Reading Download) service.
The Office of Services to the Blind (OSB) provides information and referral on services, programs, entitlements, and products of benefit to individuals who are blind or have low vision and their families or service providers. OSB staff assists such individuals in understanding the availability of services, their eligibility for services, and the purpose and scope of the various service programs.

Written By Christopher B. Dolan and Emile Davis

This week’s question comes from Matthew H. from San Francisco: My workplace is hosting a Holiday party and they are telling us to keep it work related and professional, if we decide to attend. I don’t plan on getting crazy, but can they tell us how to act outside of our work schedule? It seems a bit much.

Dear Matthew,

Each year, the Dolan Law Firm receives multiple phone calls from people who have been the victim of harassment or discrimination at company sponsored holiday parties. The Holiday season is, once again, upon us, if everyone thinks ahead, many of the potential pitfalls can be averted and everyone can enjoy the party.

End of year Holiday parties have a unique potential for sexual harassment. Several factors combine to make sexual harassment a particular danger at these types of functions. Holiday parties often take place at a location away from the worksite. This factor alone can lead to the relaxing of the behaviors people tend to understand as “workplace appropriate.” The fact that people are interacting in much more social environment than usual can also add to the tendency for people to stray from workplace norms. This is often exacerbated by the often-accepted use of alcohol at these events. This combination can be recipe for bad things to happen.

The good news is that employers can take steps to minimize the dangers of harassment. One thing an employer can do is include a copy of the workplace discrimination and harassment policies within any email or invitation, or a simple reminder that the policies in place at the worksite are applicable to the holiday party as well. Reminders that, although co-workers will be interacting socially, they must treat each other with the respect they have for one another in the workplace, can set clear guidelines for what is appropriate behavior. Archaic traditions that attempt to legitimize and trivialize harassment, such as kissing under the mistletoe, need to be left in the past.

If the employer is hosting the bar, a limitation on the number of drinks can keep people from overindulging. No good has ever come from a person over-drinking at a holiday party.

Making sure, prior to the event, that everyone has a safe way to get home is also a big help. It can save an employee from getting a DUI. And, importantly, it can ensure that an intoxicated worker is not coerced to accept a ride home from somebody who makes them uncomfortable or who has ill intent.

If the employer participates in a gift exchange or “Secret Santa” game at the holiday party, a clear understanding of what types of gifts are acceptable is imperative. Sexualized gifts may seem funny to some, but can be offensive and traumatic to others given their particular history. Joke gifts can be fun and funny, but can also cross the line into scary intentional harassment. For example, Dolan Law Firm proudly represented an African-American woman who was singled out to receive a particular gift at a holiday party- she was purposely presented a purse embroidered like a confederate flag which contained pictures of the owner of the company dressed as Donald Trump in front of a sign indicating that the south would rise again.

Another area of concern at holiday parties is religious discrimination and harassment. Not everyone celebrates Christmas. People of other faiths should not feel pressure to be involved in a religious based holiday, or to explain why they are not. We can all celebrate the end of the year, and most religions have some sort of a mid-winter holiday or day of remembrance.

When employers make the expectations clear and plans for the well-being of all the employees, it allows everyone to enjoy the Holiday party.

Each employee can also help. Everyone should have a pre-planned manner to travel home safely. Don’t encourage overindulgence in alcohol. Think about how the gift you are giving may be received. Act with dignity and respect toward your co-workers. Enjoy the party.

Hopefully, this year Dolan Law Firm does not receive one of those calls.

Written By Christopher B. Dolan and Katelyn P. Dembowski

Tess from Oakland asks: I saw on the news that California will now require public schools to carry menstrual products. Can you explain how they will implement this and when this will be available for students?

Dear Tess: Thank you for your question. This is incredible news in the advancement of safety and security for all those who menstruate.

On October 8, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB-367, requiring California public schools and colleges to stock their restrooms with free menstrual products. The Menstrual Equity for All Act of 2021 (AB-367) builds off of a 2017 California law which required low-income schools in disadvantaged areas to provide students with free menstrual products. Specifically, the 2017 law required public schools from grade 6 through grade 12, that met a 40% pupil poverty threshold, to stock 50% of their restrooms with feminine hygiene products. The 2017 bill also prohibited the public schools from charging students for the menstrual products.

The Menstrual Equity for All Act of 2021 requires public schools with grades 6 through 12 to stock all school restrooms with an adequate and free supply of menstrual products in the women’s and all-gender restrooms, and at least in one men’s restroom. Schools are required to implement this for the upcoming 2022-2023 academic school year.

Additionally, the Menstrual Equity for All Act encompasses not only public middle and high schools, but all California State Universities and the community college districts within the state to implement this policy as well. The law also encourages, but does not require, the Regents of the University of California and private universities, colleges, and institutions of higher learning to also stock adequate supplies for all menstruating pupils.

Assemblywoman, Cristina Garcia, led the charge by introducing this life-changing legislation. “Our biology doesn’t always send an advanced warning when we’re about to start menstruating, which often means we need to stop whatever we’re doing and deal with a period,” she stated regarding the new legislation.” Just as toilet paper and paper towels are provided in virtually every public bathroom, so should menstrual products.”

Garcia, who crowned herself the “Period Princess,” gained inspiration for The Menstrual Equity for All Act from a 2020 bill passed in Scotland. Scotland became the first country to make period products available to anyone who needs them in all public places. The Scottish Parliament unanimously passed the bill, which is estimated to cost the country approximately $32 million annually. Worldwide, countries like Britain, Australia, Canada, and India have eliminated taxes on menstrual products and many are working towards having free products available in public places as well.

Unfortunately, access to free and sanitary menstrual products in public spaces is not the norm. According to Women’s Voices for the Earth, more than half the states still tax menstrual products as a “luxury” item. When Women’s Voices for the Earth began tracking menstrual health policies in January 2021, there were only about 20 bills across the United States. As of November 2021, there are now more than 140 bills in 37 states, including 8 bills introduced on the federal level, to advance menstrual equity by requiring free access to period products, eliminating tax, and requiring ingredient disclosures.

The Menstrual Equity for All Act is the latest step in California toward “menstrual equity” in the nation’s most populous state. California has a history of implementing laws that are later echoed in other states, and we can only hope that states will follow suit and continue to push for menstrual equity for all persons who menstruate. This year, California also eliminated a tax on menstrual products, which used to cost Californian’s more than $20 million annually.

It is extremely difficult to have access to safe and sanitary menstrual products for low-income individuals around the world. Over 1.8 billion people around the world menstruate. For millions, stigma, taboo, and a lack of access to sanitary products stop them from participating in work, school, and daily life during their periods. A study conducted earlier this year found that 1 in 4 teens who menstruate said they struggle to afford period products.

Period poverty causes many people to miss out on life and daily activities many of us take for granted. We hope this new law will help many people who menstruate feel more secure when their period comes along, and safer knowing they will have access to sanitary menstruating products.

Written By Christopher B. Dolan and Megan Irish

This week’s question comes from Ramon P. from East Bay who asks: I have a favorite Mexican food place, and during the pandemic I was able to get their margaritas to go. It was a great treat amidst all the chaos that was the pandemic. Is that going to continue, and if so, now that so many people are back to work and, on the road, is it safe for us to do so?

Thank for your question, Ramon. Yes, people will still be able to order alcohol to go now and for the near future. Last month Governor Newsom extended the ability of restaurants to sell ‘to go’ alcohol, with food orders, through December 31, 2026, by signing Senate Bill 389. The bill was introduced by Napa representative, Bill Dodd and is ultimately stated in section 23401.5 of the Business and Professions Code. There are several safety mechanisms built into the law as well as an automatic deadline for the law to expire.

We all recognize that restaurants were hit hard when the pandemic shutdowns took effect. Countless small businesses were forced to figure out how to go from a thriving restaurant to a ‘to-go’ spot virtually overnight. Modifications to the rules, helped restaurants who were struggling to stay open. This ability to sell ‘to go’ drinks came from the emergency orders of the Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”), which is the governing body that oversees restaurant and bar’s liquor licenses. The rule change came at the end of March, 2020, just as the pandemic was settling in on Californians. As alcohol sales can make up a quarter to a third of a restaurant’s revenue, the ability to make these sales was crucial for restaurants to make it through the pandemic.

While State Bill 389 requires a food purchase in order to sell “to go” alcohol to the customer, it allows patrons to continue to take home their favorite adult beverage with their takeout meal. Here are some important points to keep in mind:
Alcohol cannot be purchased alone. The law also requires the order to be picked up by the actual customer, and not a driver from a delivery service. As well, the restaurant selling the ‘to go’ beverages is required to have a liquor license, and the beverage must be sold in a container that is sealed. A customer must store the sealed containers in the trunk of the car, or otherwise away from the passenger compartment for the drive home. There are also size limitations on the drinks that can be sold. The cocktails cannot exceed four- and one-half ounces of liquor and wine is limited to three hundred and fifty-five milliliters. As well there is a two-beverage maximum per meal purchased.

The requirement that sales are coupled with meals means smaller establishments, think your favorite dive bar, cannot sell to go beverages if they don’t have an in-house food menu. The law has restrictions, requiring a “bona-fide” meal be purchased such that prepackaged products will not meet the requirements, and the food cannot be catered in, like with a food truck. Unfortunately, the small alcohol only spots will not be able to take advantage of this law to serve its cocktails to go. The local bars will remain limited to on premises consumption only.

While all of this is under the guise of keeping restaurants going, it also brings home a lot of safety concerns just like mentioned in your question. DUIs is the first thing that comes to mind. Distracted driving is also a concern. Will people abide by the rules to leave the alcohol in the trunk until they are safely home? If the container is sealed and transported home in the trunk, there is little concern the driver of the vehicle would become intoxicated or distracted by the beverages, but what if they do not follow the rules?

California hasn’t given up all its regulations, by any means. These containers are considered “open containers” which are regulated by the Business and Professions Code, which make it an infraction to possess or consume alcohol in public. So, it is imperative that the ‘to go’ drinks stay in the trunk until the customer is safely home. That protects everyone on the road from risks associated with drinking while driving, or distractions. Additionally, the twenty-one year minimum age requirement is still in full effect, and the purchaser must be able to show ID when they pick up their order. The 2:00 am last call is also still in effect, and no one is selling drinks between the hours of 2:00 am and 6:00 am. This law, permitting the sale of ‘to go’ drinks will automatically expire on December 31, 2026. This will give Californians plenty of time to evaluate if these rule changes are helping the restaurant industry, but also importantly, to confirm if alcohol ‘to go’ is safe for Californians.

November

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.

Now, the city of Roy has withdrawn its attempt to appeal and agreed to pay an additional $793,000 in attorneys fee’s and costs. Total payout will now be $4,050,000.

Congratulations to Chris Dolan, Jeremy Jessup and their legal teams for an amazing victory!

Read the full story via Seattle Times:

Accidents Involving Pedestrians are on the Rise

Written By Christopher Dolan and Jeremy Jessup

Be Smart and Stay Aware, Even When Impaired

Written By Christopher Dolan and Vanessa Deniston

Without Jurors, The Light of Democracy Dims Remarkably

CA Laws Promote Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Family Values