- Read More
Requirements for Family Sponsored Green Cards
Family members of US citizens and permanent residents are the primary source of immigration to US. US citizens and permanent residents can sponsor some of their foreign citizen family members for green card. When the foreign family member can obtain the green card depends on the status of the petitioner (whether he is a citizen or a permanent resident) and the family relationship between the petitioner and the family member.Which Family Members Can Be Sponsored for a Green Card?
Immediate Relatives of US Citizens
So called immediate relatives of US citizens have the easiest route to immigrate to US. The category of immediate relatives includes spouses of US citizens, unmarried children under 21 of US citizens, and parents of US citizens who are 21 and older. The main advantage of being an immediate relative of a US citizen is that they are exempt from numerical quotas for the issuance of immigrant visas that apply to other family categories. The exemption means that immediate relatives, if they are otherwise admissible, will be admitted to US regardless the numerical limitations.Other Family Categories
In addition to immediate relatives of US citizens, there are other family based categories which are subject to numerical limitations. Family-sponsored immigrants are divided into four preference categories: 1) First Preference – unmarried sons and daughters of US citizens. This group includes unmarried sons and daughter who are 21 and older. Each year 23400 visas are available to family members who fall under the first preference. 2) Second Preference – spouses and unmarried sons and daughters of permanent residents. This group is divided into 2 categories: (a) spouses and unmarried sons and daughter under 21, and (b) unmarried sons and daughters who are 21 and older. Permanent residents cannot sponsor their married sons and daughters. The annual limit of visas in the second preference category is 114200. It should be noted that 77% of available visas in the second preferences category is allocated to spouses and unmarried sons and daughters under 21. 3) Third Preference – married sons and daughters of US citizens. This preference category includes married sons and daughter of US citizens whether they are under or over 21. The annual limit of visas available in this preference category is 23400. 4) Fourth Preference – brothers and sisters of US citizens. To fall under the fourth preference category the siblings must have at least one common parent. 65,000 visas are available in this category annually. Are you wondering how long it will take to bring a family member to the US? Because of the limited number of visas available each year, family members of US citizens, other than immediate relatives, might have to wait for years in order to obtain permanent residence in US. It should also be noted, that because of per country limits on issuance of visas, citizens of certain countries have to wait much longer compared to others. The waiting times for all 4 preference categories are available in the Visa Bulletin which is updated by US Department of State monthly. Family based immigration gives an opportunity to US citizens and permanent residents to bring their family members to US. However, US citizens and permanent residents must keep in mind that in many cases they might have to wait for years until their family members will be admitted to US. Speak to a Glendale immigration lawyer from KAASS Law for a consultation. We speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian. - Read More
Riding a Motorcycle Without California License VC 12500
VC 12500 Driving a Motorcycle in California Without a License
According to California Vehicle Code § 12500 It is illegal in California to drive a motorcycle, or any motor-driven or motorized cycle, unless you have a valid driver's license to do so. However, a drivers license does not need to be issued in California for it to be valid. Nonresidents of California are permitted to drive in California as long as they are over the age of 18, and have, in their possession, a valid driver's license from the jurisdiction in which they reside. According to California Vehicle Code § 12503, if the jurisdiction in which the individual resides does not require driver's licenses, then the individual is permitted to drive in California without a driver's license, but not to exceed 30 days.What Does "State of Domicile" Mean?
According to California Vehicle Code § 12505, an individual's place of residence is determined by their "state of domicile," which is "the state where a person has his or her true, fixed, and permanent home and principal residence and to which he or she has manifested the intention of returning whenever he or she is absent." This means that an individual is domiciled in the state in which they intend to live for an indefinite amount of time. If the individual came to California from Nevada with the intent to stay for a month and then return back to their home in Nevada, then their domicile, and residency, is in Nevada. Courts will typically look at evidence such as: where an individual is registered to vote; where an individual pays taxes; and whether the individual pays resident tuition at a university in order to establish an individual's state of residency.What is Vehicle Code § 12500 et seq.?
Under California Vehicle Code 12500(a), a person may not drive a motor vehicle upon a highway, unless the person then holds a valid driver's license issued under this code, except those persons who are expressly exempted under this code.What Are The Penalties for VC 12500 Driving a Motorcycle in California Without a License?
VC 12500(a) driving without a valid license can be charged as either a California infraction or a California misdemeanor. The misdemeanor penalties for driving without a license can include:- Up to six (6) months in county jail and/or
- A fine of up to one thousand dollars ($1
What Does the Court Need to Prove Under VC 12500?
In order for the court to prove that you are guilty of driving without a valid license, they must establish two elements:- You drove on a street or highway, and
- At the time you drove, you did not hold a validly issued driver's license.
Motorcycle Accident: No Motorcycle License and No Insurance: Proposition 213 Uninsured Motorist
Under California law, drivers are required to carry liability insurance when operating a motor vehicle on a public road. If you were involved in an accident, due to the fault of another, while operating a motor vehicle without liability insurance you likely fall under "Proposition 213". Under California law, uninsured motorists involved in traffic collisions within the State of California, whether or not the collision was caused by the uninsured motorist, are not allowed to recover general damages such as pain and suffering. If you have been charged with VC 12500, KAASS Law may be able to help you either dismiss or reduce your VC 12500 charges to a less-serious infraction. If you were involved in a motorcycle accident you were both unlicensed and uninsured at the time of the collision, we further invite you to call our Los Angeles Motorcycle accident lawyer at {meta.phoneFormatted} any time! Our law firm is dedicated to getting our clients the compensation they deserve. Get in touch with our law firm now or sign up online for a consultation and case review. We speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian. - Read More
How to Qualify for E-2 Investor Immigration Visa
How to Qualify for E-2 Investor Immigration Visa
E-2 investor visa allows entry to the United States (from another country that the United States maintains a treat y with) in order to work based on a substantial amount of investment and control he or she will hold while in the United States.In Order to Qualify For an E-2 Nonimmigrant Visa, You Must Satisfy the Following:
- Nationals must be from a country that has an existing treaty with the United States;
- Substantial investment, ownership, or control must be held by the nationals; and
- A citizenship of that country must be held by those seeking E status under the treaty.
Active Investment
The investment must be active. An active investment refers to its operation and services. In other words, the investment must allow the investor to undertake procedures in an effort to produce goods for profit. The investor must be engaged in the business enterprise; passive activities within the business enterprise will not qualify. For example, purchasing a property may not be sufficient. Instead, the investor must hire employees in order to manage, develop, improve, and maintain that property. Throughout this process, the investor must remain active by controlling and directing the investment in order to begin or continue providing services.Substantial Investment
The investment must be substantial. While there is no set minimum amount to consider the investment "substantial," it must nonetheless be substantial in its connection to the total expenses of purchasing an existing or already established business enterprise. Also, a substantial amount of capital must be sufficient to secure the successful operation of the business enterprise. One of two tests must be met in order to be considered a "substantial" investment:- If an investment is made towards an existing business, then it must be proportional to the full value of that enterprise;
- If an investment is made towards a new business, then it must be an amount generally deemed necessary to establish a practical enterprise of that type.
Not Marginal Investment
Investment must not be marginal. That is to say, the investment must have the potential or power to produce enough income in order to support a decent living for the treaty investor and his family. Additionally, in most instances, such investment should provide individuals living in the U.S. with job opportunities. While creating employment opportunities for U.S. workers is not a requirement, it can be used to show that the investment is not marginal. When an investment is not considered to be marginal, it will require individuals beyond the investor to operate the business or enterprise. Further, it will generate enough income to fulfill the investors living expenses, along with payment of its U.S. workers. Therefore, the issue is whether there is a projected and reliable return on the investment in order to meet the requirements of an E-2 treaty investor visa.Essential Role in Enterprise
An essential role in an enterprise can be held by both the principal investor and certain employees of the investing enterprise. Both can obtain a treaty-investor status. An individual, applying to enter the U.S. as a treaty investor, is considered a principal investor when he has a majority - at least 50% - ownership in the business, along with the responsibly of controlling and developing that enterprise. This generally occurs when the investor owns a majority and controlling interest in the business. Another way an individual can enter the U.S. is as an employee of a company. In order to qualify for an E-2 nonimmigrant visa as an employee of a treaty investor, the following must be satisfied:- Nationals from a treaty country must serve in a managerial capacity; or
- Nationals from a treaty country who serve in technological capacity, such that
- special skills, expertise, training, and qualifications are required in order to start-up the business;
- national is needed to train or supervise others within that capacity; or
- monitor and expand product improvement and quality.
- Read More
When is Your Trademark Being Infringed?
As an owner of a registered trademark or service, you probably wonder when others are responsible for infringing your mark. You should know that the test for trademark infringement is the likelihood of confusion as a result of the similarity of the marks.
What is Likelihood of Confusion for Trademark Infringement?
A person may be liable for infringement of a federally registered mark if his use of a mark in relation to any goods of services is likely to cause confusion, mistake or to deceive. 15 U.S.C.A. § 1114(1). This test to determine whether a registered mark is being infringed is known as the test of likelihood of confusion.
Likelihood of Confusion as to Source, Affiliation, Connection or Sponsorship
The test of likelihood of confusion includes not only the confusion as to source but also as to affiliation, connection or sponsorship. Champions Golf Club v. Champions Golf Club, 78 F.3d 1111, 1121 (6th Cir. 1996) (internal citations omitted). This means that a user of a mark may be liable for trademark infringement if the use creates a likelihood of confusion that the goods are affiliated to, connected with or sponsored by the owner of the registered mark.
Likelihood of Confusion Means Probability of Confusion
In order to show likelihood of confusion, there must be a probability of confusion; mere possibility of confusion is not enough. Nora Beverages, Inc. v. The Perrier Group of America, Inc., 269 F.3d 114, 121 (2d Cir. 2001) (internal citations omitted). It should also be noted that plaintiff does not have to prove actual confusion in order to show that the defendant is liable for trademark infringement. Perfumebay.com Inc. v. eBay, Inc., 506 F.3d 1165, 1176 (9th Cir. 2007) (internal citations omitted). If the plaintiff is able to show likelihood of confusion the defendant will still be liable for trademark infringement even if the plaintiff shows no instances of actual confusion.
There Should Be a Likelihood of Confusion of an Appreciable Number of Reasonably Prudent Consumers
The test for likelihood of confusion is whether a reasonably prudent consumer is likely to be confused as a result of the similarity of the marks. Dreamwerks Production Group, Inc. v. SKG Studio, 142 F.3d 1127, 1129 (9th Cir. 1998) (internal citations omitted). The likelihood of confusion exists when there is a likelihood that an appreciable number of reasonably prudent consumers is likely to be misled or confused because of the similarity of the marks. McGregor-Doniger, Inc. v. Drizzle, Inc., 599 F.2d 1126, 1130 (2d Cir. 1979) (internal citations omitted).
To sum up, there is a likelihood of confusion when there is a probability that an appreciable number of reasonably prudent consumers will be confused as to the source, affiliation, connection or sponsorship of goods or services because of the similarity of the two marks.
What Factors Determine if There is a Likelihood of Confusion?
The Sleekcraft Test for Likelihood of Confusion
Federal courts in different federal circuits have come up with multi-factor tests in order to determine whether there is a likelihood of confusion or not. The test in the 9th Circuit, which includes the State of California, is the eight-factor Sleekcraft test pursuant to which the court shall consider the following factors to determine if there is a likelihood of confusion or not:
- strength of the mark;
- proximity of the goods;
- similarity of the marks;
- evidence of actual confusion;
- marketing channels used;
- type of goods and the degree of care likely to be exercised by the purchaser;
- defendant's intent in selecting the mark; and
- likelihood of expansion of the product lines. AMF, Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341, 348-49 (9th Cir. 1979) (internal citations omitted).
These factors are not requirements but are helpful guidelines for courts in order to determine whether there is a likelihood of confusion or not. Eclipse Ass'n, Ltd. v. Data General Corp., 894 F.2d 1114, 1118 (9th Cir. 1990). The application of the text shall be flexible, and there is no specific formula setting forth how the factors included in the text shall be considered. Nautilus Group, Inc. v. ICON Health and Fitness, Inc., 372 F.3d 1330, 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (internal citations omitted). The important question is what the analysis as a whole reveals about the issue of likelihood of confusion. Entrepreneur Media, Inc. v. Smith, 279 F.3d 1135, 1141 (9th Cir. 2002). This means that none of the factors is determinative but the analysis as a whole shall answer the question whether there is a likelihood of confusion or not.
The Degree of Similarity of Marks Necessary to Prove Likelihood of Confusion Varies Depending on the Similarity of Goods or Services
It should be noted that the degree of similarity of marks necessary to show likelihood of confusion varies depending on the competitiveness of goods and services. The more similar the goods or services the less similar marks need to be in order to prove likelihood of confusion. Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of America, 970 F.2d 874, 877 (internal citations omitted). Conversely, "... the greater the degree of similarity between the marks, the lesser the degree of similarity between the goods is necessary to support a finding of likelihood of confusion." The Board of Regents, University of Texas System v. Southern Illinois Miners, LLC, 110 U.S.P.Q.2d 1182, 1189 (internal citations omitted). Hence, if the marks are very similar the court may find a likelihood of confusion even if the goods or services at issue are not very similar.
To summarize, your trademark or service mark is being infringed if a use of another mark creates a likelihood of confusion among consumers. If the other mark is very similar to your trademark or service mark you might have a cause of action for trademark infringement even if the goods or services are not very similar.
If you believe someone is infringing on your trademark or have questions regarding trademark registration, copyright, or any other intellectual property related question, we invite you to contact our office and speak to one of our experienced business attorneys at {meta.phoneFormatted}.
- Read More
Dog Bite Laws: California Civil Code § 3342
California Civil Code § 3342 Dog Bite Statute
(a) The owner of any dog is liable for the damages suffered by any person who is bitten by the dog while in a public place or lawfully in a private place, including the property of the owner of the dog, regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owner's knowledge of such viciousness. A person is lawfully upon the private property of such owner within the meaning of this section when he is on such property in the performance of any duty imposed upon him by the laws of this state or by the laws or postal regulations of the United States, or when he is on such property upon the invitation, express or implied, of the owner. (b) Nothing in this section shall authorize the bringing of an action pursuant to subdivision (a) against any governmental agency using a dog in military or police work if the bite or bites occurred while the dog was defending itself from an annoying, harassing, or provoking act, or assisting an employee of the agency in any of the following: (1) In the apprehension or holding of a suspect where the employee has a reasonable suspicion of the suspect's involvement in criminal activity. (2) In the investigation of a crime or possible crime. (3) In the execution of a warrant. (4) In the defense of a peace officer or another person. (c) Subdivision (b) shall not apply in any case where the victim of the bite or bites was not a party to, nor a participant in, nor suspected to be a party to or a participant in, the act or acts that prompted the use of the dog in the military or police work. (d) Subdivision (b) shall apply only where a governmental agency using a dog in military or police work has adopted a written policy on the necessary and appropriate use of a dog for the police or military work enumerated in subdivision (b). Although, the owner(s)' of a dog who has bitten another person is held strictly liable for damages in California. There is a defense to this rule known as "assumption of risk" Assumption of risk can be used as a defense when the victim of a dog bite is working in the capacity of a veterinarian, or some other contracted dog handler. Cohen v. McIntyre, 16 Cal. App. 4th 650 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. June 15, 1993); Priebe v. Nelson, 140 P.3d 848 (Cal. Aug. 28, 2006). "The doctrine of assumption of risk, which is generally applicable in strict liability actions has long been recognized as a defense to a personal injury action brought pursuant to the dog bite statute (§ 3342) under appropriate facts." Priebe, 140 P.3d 848, 853.Can I Still Be Sued If The Dog Bite Did Not Result in Any Lacerations?
While many may be under the impression that you can only be sued if your dog bit someone which resulted in scarring or breaking of the skin; "it is not necessary that the skin be broken in order for the statute to apply". (Johnson v. McMahan (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 173, 176 [80 Cal.Rptr.2d 173].) In Priebe, the Supreme Court of California held that the defendant dog owner was not strictly liable when his dog bit the plaintiff kennel worker. Id. at 861. The court reasoned, "Priebe, by virtue of the nature of her occupation as a kennel worker, assumed the risk of being bitten or otherwise injured by the dogs under her care and control while in the custody of the commercial kennel where she worked pursuant to a contractual boarding agreement." Id. Similarly, the court in Cohen, held that the plaintiff veterinarian assumed the risk of being bitten by the defendant's dog, and therefore was barred from recovery. Cohen, 16 Cal. App. 4th 650, 657. However, the court in Davis v. Gaschler, held that the assumption of risk did not apply when the plaintiff stopped to help a dog that was hit by a car and was bitten by the dog. Davis v. Gaschler, 11 Cal. App. 4th 1392, 1402 (Cal. App. 3d Dist. Dec. 23, 1992). The court reasoned, "plaintiff was not employed or otherwise compensated for helping injured dogs. Nor was there an employment relationship or any relationship between plaintiff and defendants." Id. at 1401.Essential Elements You Must Prove in Dog Bite Statute Civ. Code, § 3342
In California, dog owners can be held responsible for the harm from a dog bite, no matter how carefully they guard or restrain their dogs.In Order to Establish a Claim, Plaintiff Must Prove All of the following:
- That defendant owned a dog;
- That the dog bit Plaintiff while [he/she] was in a public place or lawfully on private property;
- That Plaintiff was harmed; and
- That Defendant's dog was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff harm.
Los Angeles Dog Bite Attorney
Are you in need of a dog bite lawyer in California? A Los Angeles dog bite attorney can provide you with the services you need. KAASS Law can help you out with various types of personal injury and dog bite cases. If you have questions regarding dog bite laws in California, we invite you to contact our experienced Glendale personal injury attorneys for a consultation at {meta.phoneFormatted} or our Los Angeles branch at (310) 943-1173. - Read More
What is Shifting Burden of Proof?
Generally, in tort law, the burden of proof falls on the plaintiff. This means that the plaintiff holds the burden of proving the claims made against the defendant. This usually sounds fair because the individual making the claim should have to prove the claims they are making. However, sometimes fairness demands that the burden be switched on to the defendant to prove that they were not in fact negligent. In order for a Plaintiff to meet his or her burden of proof by circumstantial evidence.
Such is the case for the "res ipsa loquitur" doctrine. Res ipsa loquitur is Latin for "the thing speaks for itself." Under this doctrine, the plaintiff is permitted to make a prima facia claim against the defendant for negligence, without actually having to prove the actual negligent act(s). 3-31 California Torts § 31.32
How To Prove Res Ipsa Loquitor Negligence?
Plaintiff must prove three (3) things,
- The incident was of a type that does not generally happen without negligence;
- It was caused by an instrumentality solely in defendant's control; and
- The plaintiff did not contribute to the cause
Res ipsa loquitur is important because sometimes it is impossible for the plaintiff to provide evidence. This is usually the case in medical malpractice suits where the plaintiff was unconscious when the negligent act(s) causing damages occurred. In Ybarra v. Spangard, the Court held that due to the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, the burden of proof switched on to the defendants when the plaintiff was unconscious during the negligent acts and was unable to prove which medical professional acted negligently, and caused her injuries. Ybarra v. Spangard, 154 P.2d 687, 691 (Cal. Dec. 27, 1944).
Another case where res ipsa loquitur comes into play is when multiple people may have caused the plaintiff's damages, and it would be impossible for the plaintiff to prove which exact person it was. In Summers v. Tice, the Court held that two defendants, who had negligently shot at the plaintiff, were both liable for the plaintiff's injuries even though only one of them technically caused it. Summers v. Tice, 199 P.2d 1, 5, 1948 (Cal. 1948). The Court explained that it would be impossible for the plaintiff to prove which of the defendants actually caused the injury because they both shot their guns in her direction at the same time. Id. The Court therefore applied the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, and found both defendants equally liable because neither could meet the burden of proving they did not cause the injury.
Give us a call, our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian.
KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS Law does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office.
KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.
- Read More
Motorcycle Accidents: Moto Vrooms, Engine Purrs, the Scariest Sound Ever Herd
It is always a drag getting involved in a motor vehicle accident. Literally. An automobile, with all the built in protections to keep you safe and cozy from all the noise, smoke, and life threatening injuries. For Example the B-Pillar, which is the part of the automobile frame which your seat belt is usually attached to. This part of the car is a life saver from T-bone accidents and collision. See image. Now substitute the automobile with all its fine tuned standard protections against bodily injury and death with a pretty 2 wheeler. A motorcycle, yes that thing that buzzes next to you on the 10, 405, and my favorite the 2 freeway. The machine we have all wanted to ride or learn how to ride, but more one reason or many opted to save more than a pretty penny. With a motorcyclist, whom we are all afraid of injuring or potentially even worse.
I can honestly say that after years in the practice of representing motorcycle accident victims with massive traumatic and life changing injuries, I have more or less developed a sort of PTSD. Every time I hear the purring of the motorcycle's engine in the back of my ear, I automatically remember 2 things. Do not even think about placing or answering a hands-free phone call of course and put down that country music. Post-Traumatic Stress you say? I say, my civil duty for the safety of my fellow man. Exactly. I feel as if I worry about these souls more than they. Whizzing, squeezing, cutting, splitting, and my favorite, all while stylishly popping a wheelie standing on the seat with one leg no hands or helmet, providing job security for the Highway Patrol. Oh, yes, slightly, the undiagnosed kind.
In Los Angeles, California, out of the approximate 4 million population about 2,000 Motorcycle death or injury occurred in just in 2014 alone. California Office of Highway Safety. Yes, we are talking about the City of Los Angeles, not the County of Los Angeles, which houses an approximate 10 million residence (2014). U.S. Census Bureau. American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B02001. American FactFinder. Retrieved October 26, 2013.
Stay safe my friends. You have all given us so much business in the past and we have fearlessly advocated for your causes and brought in the big settlement bucks. However, as I hear our attorneys time and time again pragmatically and unsuccessfully advise – "Maybe you keep off that thing for a while."
- Read More
Causes of Motorcycle Accidents in Los Angeles
Causes of Motorcycle Accidents in Los Angeles
Some common causes of motorcycle accidents, Los Angeles County:- Left Turns In Front of Motorcyclists: Left turn motorcycle accidents generally occur at an intersection. Often times a motorist proceeds to complete a left turn in front of oncoming traffic and collide with a motorcyclist riding in the opposing lane. Pursuant to Vehicle Code 21801 The driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left or to complete a U-turn upon a highway, or to turn left into public or private property, or an alley, shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles approaching from the opposite direction which is close enough to constitute a hazard at any time during the turning movement, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to the approaching vehicles until the left turn or U-turn can be made with reasonable safety.
- Unsafe Lane Changes: Unsafe lane changes, generally occur more frequently on freeways, but also on surface streets. The large majority of motorist fail to check their rear and side view mirrors. Many times motorists will abruptly change lanes without checking blind spots. We have seen this far too many times when a motorist fails to put their turn signal on and check blind spots, which ultimately results in colliding with the motorcyclist. who doesn't have time to react or has nowhere to escape. Pursuant to VC §22107 drivers must use reasonable care when turning [or moving to the right or to the left].
- Vehicle Pulling Out of Side Streets or Parking Lot Colliding with a Motorcyclist Rider: These types of motorcycle collisions occur when a car, truck or SUV pull out in front of the motorcyclists from a side street or parking lot without looking both ways or reasonable care. These types of accidents generally cause a T-bone type or broadside collision. Under VC 21804, (a) The driver of any vehicle about to enter or cross a highway from any public or private property, or from an alley, shall yield the right-of-way to all traffic, as defined in Section 620, approaching on the highway close enough to constitute an immediate hazard, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to that traffic until he or she can proceed with reasonable safety. (b) A driver having yielded as prescribed in subdivision (a) may proceed to enter or cross the highway, and the drivers of all other vehicles approaching on the highway shall yield the right-of-way to the vehicle entering or crossing the intersection.
Why Should You Hire A California Motorcycle Accident Attorney?
Hiring a motorcycle accident attorney can help preserve your claim, increase compensation, and deal with the difficulties of dealing with insurance companies and insurance adjusters. Many times the adjusters will try to blame the motorcyclist by saying you were not riding at a safe speed during the collision or perhaps riding at excessive speed. Your motorcycle accident attorney will have Neurologists, Orthopedists, and other doctors to help treat you for your injuries. Many of these specialists take cases on a lien basis. This means that you will not have to pay out of pocket for the treatment you receive until you recover monies. to determine the full extent of the injuries. A quality motorcycle lawyer will hire experts, if necessary, to reconstruct the accident and/or speak to the forces exerted on the human body of the motorcycle rider. If you or a loved one has been involved in a motorcycle accident in Glendale near Los Angeles, CA we invite you to contact our office for a confidential consultation and case evaluation with an experienced Glendale personal injury attorneys and Los Angeles motorcycle accident lawyers at {meta.phoneFormatted}. Give us a call, our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian. - Read More
California Motorcycle Property Damage Claims
Motorcycle Property Damage Claim
It is important that a motorcyclists documents and obtains photographs of all damage sustained to the motorcycle including dents, scrapes, bent wheels, and broken shocks. Taking photographs and even videos of the property damages your bike sustained following an accident help provide visual evidence to insurance adjusters when writing your demands and even evidence if the claim is filed litigation. Complete documentation is the best way to help ensure full recovery of repair or replacement costs.
What Should I Do If My Bike Sustained Property Damage Following an Motorcycle Accident?
First, you should obtain an estimate of the property damages. Generally, the property damage estimate is based on the cost of parts and the amount of time it takes to repair or replace parts based on the labor rate the motorcycle repair shop charges. It is important to remember, if your motorcycle has aftermarket parts and we damaged, as a result of the accident, the estimate may not reflect the necessary replacement cost.
Motorcycle Accident Comprehensive Coverage
Motorcycle accident somprehensive coverage generally covers damages caused by:
- Fire
- Theft
- Vandalism
- Adverse weather conditions
- Falling objects
- Hitting or being hit by an animal
Motorcycle Custom Parts and Equipment (CPE) Coverage
CPE coverage covers damage to custom motorcycle parts and motorcycle accessories. It is possible that your motorcycle insurance includes comprehensive insurance policy which may include some CPE coverage―usually at least $1,000 in most states.
What if My Motorcycle is Deemed a Total Loss?
Sometimes, the cost of repairs to the motorcycle is beyond a certain percentage of its appraised value or damage to the motorcycle is beyond repair. Thus, the insurance property damage adjuster will determine the value of your motorcycle. If you are unhappy or disagree with the appraised amount, you can do your own research on similar make and models and provide it to the insurance company in order to help establish the "fair market value" of your damaged bike.
What if I Have a Vintage Motorcycle?
If you were involved in an an accident with a motorcycle that is considered a "vintage model", you may want to consider getting the vintage motorcycle appraised by a specialist.
Can I Claim Loss of Use for a Motorcycle Accident?
If you were involved in an motorcycle accident in Los Angeles, San Bernandino, or Orange County, you may also be entitled to compensation for the loss of use of your motorcycle throughout the repair or replacement process. This compensation can be in the form of cash or reimbursement for the cost of a rental vehicle.
FOR A FREE DETAILED REVIEW BY OUR AWARD WINNING LOS ANGELES MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENT ATTORNEYS
Please call {meta.phoneFormatted} and speak to an experienced Los Angeles motorcycle accident attorney for free on our 24/7 accident hotline. Our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian.
KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS Law does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office.
KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, San Bernardino, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.
- Read More
3 Reasons Why You Should Register Your Trademark Internationally
One of the most difficult aspects of protecting your trademark in today's world is protecting it on an international level. Unfortunately, there is no tool that allows business owners to register a trademark "globally". Otherwise, trademark owners must register its trademark in each and every individual country where it seeks trademark protection. Starting October 1, 2017, the European Union trade mark regulation changes. The European Union Intellectual Property Office; among other things, has made a number of procedural changes, thus it is vital you speak to a Glendale trademark attorney in order to help protect your business. Here are three reasons why you should register your trademark internationally.1. Prevent International Businesses from Using Your Brand's Popularity
Once you begin selling your products in international markets, your business name and brand may become more attractive as your popularity grows. Registering your trademark in countries which your products are available can prevent other businesses from attempting to confuse consumers by using your businesses identical or similar name or profit from your business's popularity.2. As Populatirty of Your Brand Increases, the Likelihood of International Counterfeiters Increases
Foreign trademark filing is a big business decision, thus businesses should consider many factors when doing so. U.S. trademark law provides protection against businesses importing counterfeit goods. However, you may also register your trademark in a country where you believe counterfeit goods are originating from. This will not only help prevent counterfeit goods being exported to other countries.3. Prevents Other Businesses from Registering Your Businesses Brand Name, Logo, or Tagline
If your business fails to register their trademark internationally, you bare the risk of allowing another party to "take" your trademark first in the foreign country. This can obviously create a lot of problems. For instance, this can disrupt the distribution of your products in or from the country. If you have questions regarding trademark applications or any other business law questions give us a call and receive a consultation with one of our experienced Glendale business lawyers. KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS Law does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office. KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, San Bernardino, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.