Stay updated with the latest legal news, expert analysis, and firm updates from KAASS LAW.
Whether you're facing a legal challenge or seeking proactive counsel, our award-winning team is ready to defend your interests.
California law criminalizes the act of conducting "assault" and defines it as an unlawful attempt of a person to commit a violent injury to someone when there was a high ability to commit this injury. Teachers and other school employees enjoy high protection under state legislation. As such, California Penal Code section 245.5 PC is makes it a crime to assault of a school employee.
Under Penal Code section 245.5 PC the victim is the "school employee". A victim qualifies as a school employee if they are a permanent or probationary employee. This includes both full-time or part-time, including teachers, substitute teachers, and other administrative employees. For example, school bust drivers also fall under "school employees".
To be found guilty under PC 245.5, the prosecution must prove that:
To be charged and convicted under this offense, the school employee must be performing their employment duties at the time of the offense. Thus, if the assault occurs in the evening while the teacher is walking in the park with his dog, the defendant cannot face charges under Penal Code section 245.5.
Penal Code 245.5 PC makes it a crime to assault a school employee with a deadly weapon, a firearm, or a stun gun or taser or by any other means likely to produce great bodily injury upon the person of a school employee. Penal Code 245.5 PC can result in either a misdemeanor or a felony charge.
Penalties for a 245.5 PC conviction vary based on the type of weapon used during the assault.
If the defendant used a deadly weapon, other than a firearm, the penalties include imprisonment in the state prison for 3, 4 or a maximum of 5 years of imprisonment in jail for up to one year.
If the defendant used a firearm while conducting the assault, the penalties include imprisonment in state prison for 4,6 or 8 years of imprisonment in jail for up to one year.
In the event the defendant used a stun gun or a taser, the penalties include imprisonment in state prison for 2, 3, or 4 years of imprisonment in a country jail for up to one year.
Defendants charged under section 245.5 may have several defenses. One such defense is lack of intent. If the defendant:
The defense can argue that the assault was not intentional. In addition, the defense of necessity may be used. If the defendant acted in response to an immediate threat to his or her health or life.
If the defendant accused of assaulting a school employee pleads guilty, or if there are mitigating circumstances, the defense may request a reduced sentence. This may include suggestions for alternative action. Such as:
It is important to note that the court's decision will largely depend on:
Punishment for the crime of assaulting a school employee can have a significant impact on the defendant's career. Especially if he or she works in education. A charge under Section 245.5 may result in:
And other professional consequences that may limit future employment opportunities.
It is important to contact an experienced attorney who specializes in criminal cases. A defense attorney will be able to:
If you or a loved one is facing charges under California Penal Code Section 245.5, do not delay in consulting with a qualified attorney.
It is essential to consult with a Los Angeles criminal defense attorney to try to mitigate the punishment for the commitment of the assault. We invite you to contact our criminal defense attorney today at (310) 943-1171 for a free consultation and case review.
This bill was passed on March 6, 2021. Provides relief to address the continued impact COVID-19 has had on the economy, public health, individuals, and businesses.
The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 will provide funding for individuals and entities. Including but not limited to, schools and institutions of higher education, small businesses, and emergency rental and homeowner assistance. The Act will also provide an extension on unemployment benefits, expand and otherwise modify certain tax credits, including the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit.
This credit is for parents who have children under the age of 17 years old. Taxpayers can claim a child tax credit of up to $2,000 for each child under the age of 17 years old who is an American citizen. The credit reduces by 5% of adjusted gross income over $200,000 for a single parent and $400,000 for married couples.
The earned income tax credit is a way to support working parents who are either of low or moderate income. Working parents can get a credit equal to a percentage of their earnings for up to a maximum credit. In 2019, this credit could be up to $6,557 and $6,660 in 2020. However, once the credit reaches its maximum, the credit will lower with each additional dollar of income made until no credit is available.
Garage door accidents are not uncommon but they can still occur due to poor installation and lack of maintenance. Whether the accident happens inside your own home, someone else’s home, or a public place, a garage door accident can be very serious. Some common garage door accidents include:
A garage door malfunctioning can cause any number of serious injuries, depending on the severity of the accident. Injuries that can be a cause by a garage door accident include:
When you are in an accident with a drunk driver, it seems obvious that the driver should be responsible for your losses. However, drunk drivers are not always automatically completely liable in a motor vehicle accident in California. In some cases, accidents involving a drunk driver may not result from the drunk driver themselves.
To hold a driver responsible for an accident, he or she must have been driving in an unlawful or negligent manner which directly caused the accident. This includes any number of traffic safety rule violations such as:
Liability depends on examining the facts of the accident and identifying the direct cause, which can be quite complex. Consult with one of our Los Angeles Personal Injury attorneys to help you figure out who was at fault in your accident.
Negligence is the most important factor when deciding liability in a case. The legal definition of negligence is “a failure to behave with the level of care that someone of ordinary prudence would have exercised under the same circumstances.” In other words, it is a failure to act with a level of care that a reasonable person would have acted with in the same situation. Civil negligence, however, differs from criminal.
Proving negligence is sometimes more of a process rather than an immediate decision made by pointing fingers. There are four elements that an attorney must prove in order to prove negligence:
There are a number of ways that your attorney can prove these different elements of negligence, including:
Have you ever heard of card rooms; state-run lotteries? Have you ever wondered whether California considers horse race wagering legal? This article will provide an overview of existing gambling regulations.
Though there is no certain definition for gambling under California State Law, the practice shows that the following elements shall be present to qualify the actions as gambling:
The California State Constitution considers gambling illegal in California. However, some types of gambling are exceptions to the general rule. Particularly, California law permits:
The main legislative act regulating gambling in California is called Gambling Control Act. This act sets out the relevant licensing terms for the entities, which are involved in the gambling market. California Gambling Control Commission issues particular regulations for gaming licenses. Besides, it also issues licenses to owners, supervisors, players, and employees of gambling institutions. It is considered that licenses shall be renewed bi-annually and they may not be assigned or transferred in whole or in part under California Business and Profession Code. This means that a separate application for receiving a license must be submitted for there to be a change in corporate control of the licensed entity. California allows tribal casinos, and the state and the tribe negotiate their regulations. The regulations will cover revenue sharing details, licensing terms, and other related matters.
Penal Code 422.55 PC defines hate crime as a criminal act committed due to the victim’s disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or association with a person or group with one or more of these actual or perceived characteristics.
An actual characteristic for hate crime purposes essentially means that the individual is committing a hate crime towards another due to the victim’s actual status regarding disability, gender, or any of the other listings as seen under Penal Code 422.55 PC.
A perceived characteristic for hate crime purposes means that the individual commits a hate crime that is not based on one of the characteristics listed under Penal Code 422.55 PC but that they perceived the victim as such. For example, an individual may have the impression that a person they have seen around their neighborhood is of a certain sexual orientation that they do not like and because of this perception, that individual commits a crime against this neighbor. However, the neighbor was never of the sexual orientation the individual perceived them to be. Since the individual perceived their neighbor's sexual orientation and committed a crime, they would still commit a hate crime.
According to California Health and Safety Code Section 120290 it a crime to willfully transmitting a communicable, infectious, or contagious disease. According to California Health and Safety Code Section 120290(a)(2), it is illegal to ignore the instructions of a health professional regarding transmitting an infectious disease.
One potential cause of action is negligence. With this type of claim, the plaintiff must be able to prove that
The keystone of a negligence claim is that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty to disclose information about the STD, allowing the plaintiff to decide on exposure. In some cases, liability for negligence lies if the defendant exposed the plaintiff to a sexually transmitted disease, even if the transmission didn’t occur. Usually, damages in this situation are based on the mental anguish and emotional distress.
Did you know that a tax applies when someone transfers property after passing? This is typically called a death tax, where the estate pays taxes before transferring assets to the beneficiary.
Death taxes are taxes that are enforced by the federal and sometimes by the state government on someone’s estate upon their death. These taxes can be either charged on the beneficiary who receives the property in the deceased’s will or the estate which, pays the tax before transferring the inherited property. Essentially, the government taxes individuals on the right to transfer property to heirs after death. Therefore, that tax can be based on the total value of the decedent’s estate or the value of a single bequest.
The government charges estate tax based on the property and assets’ value at the time of the owner’s death. This tax typically applies only to amounts exceeding certain exemptions, not to the entire value of the estate. In 2020, the federal estate tax exemption was $11.58 million, based on the Tax Cut and Jobs Act. This will terminate in 2025 unless Congress decided to renew it. In the event Congress chooses not to renew, it will return back to $5 million. However, back in 2001, the estate tax exemption was $675,000. Thus, the estate's net value over that amount taxed at 55%.
One of the most common types of product liability claims in this state is, California failure to warn laws, cases. According to the law, a manufacturer, distributor, and other parties involved in the distribution chain of distribution are required to provide adequate warnings on a product.
The plaintiff must prove the following element to establish the failure to warn claim in California
The plaintiff must be able to prove that he used the product was something the manufacturer could have predicted but failed to warn about the potential harm of using the product in such a way. In addition to that, it is important to prove that the risks of this particular use were not obvious to you as a consumer.
As mentioned, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 alters existing tax policies. For example, the child tax credit will be increased from $2,000 to $3,600. Per child that is under the age of 6. Also, those who have children ages 6 to 17 years old and low tax bills can expect a tax credit of $3,000 per child. This is a new system that will pay a portion of the child tax credit in advance over the last 6 months of the year. Additionally, tax credit will be extended for single individuals who make more than $75,000 and married individuals who make more than $150,000. The existing credit tops out for single individuals making more than $200,000 and married individuals making more than $400,000. The legislation also effects the tax credits that parents receive to subsidize the cost of child care this year. Currently, the credit is worth 20% to 35% of eligible expenses with a maximum value of $2,100 for two or more qualifying individuals. The stimulus bill increases that amount to $4,000 for one qualifying individual or $8,000 for two or more. KAASS LAW will guide you through the complexities of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and help you maximize your tax credits and relief benefits.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2021 (ARRA) has a significant impact on health care by expanding access to insurance and easing the financial burden for millions of Americans. The Act significantly modifies the current Premium Tax Credit (PTC) provisions. which is designed to reduce the cost of health insurance policies purchased through state exchanges Under the provisions of ARPA, taxpayers with incomes above 400% of the federal poverty level became eligible for tax subsidies in tax years 2021 through 2022. Only if the cost of the insurance policy exceeded 8.5% of their income. Prior to the passage of ARPA, these taxpayers were completely excluded from the PTC program. This change allowed more people to purchase affordable health insurance. Especially in light of the economic instability caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, ARPA included a special provision for individuals who received unemployment benefits for at least one week in 2021. In such cases, the taxpayer was eligible for the maximum premium tax credit regardless of actual income for the year. This provision temporarily removed barriers to health insurance coverage for unemployed individuals.
The act also provided significant funding for state and local governments to recover from the effects of the pandemic. In total, ARPA provided $350 billion to support various levels of government. These funds will be used to ensure:
and other socially important sectors. States have flexibility in how they use the funds. However, they must comply with federal transparency and accountability requirements. Some of the funds have also been earmarked for investments in:
This is especially important for rural and sparsely populated areas. If you would like to learn more about your eligibility for tax credits, the attorneys at KAASS LAW are available for a free consultation. Call (310) 943-1171 for professional assistance.
To figure out who is liable in a garage door accident, it is crucial to know what caused the accident or any malfunction of the garage door. Among those that can be a consideration in a liable party include:
If you file a lawsuit after a garage door accident injury, then compensations are applicable for damages or losses due to the accident. For instance, these include both economic and non-economic damages, including:
To file a lawsuit for a garage door accident, a plaintiff must prove that the injury occurred as a result of:
In such cases, both negligence and strict liability may apply. If improper installation caused the accident, the property owner may face liability.
Under California law, property owners have a duty to maintain their property in a safe condition. This includes ensuring that garage doors are in working and safe condition. If an owner was aware of a defective gate and failed to repair it, he or she may be found guilty of negligence. Liability can also arise if the victim was on the property with permission. For example, as a guest.
In cases where the accident was caused by a defect in the design or mechanism of a garage door, the manufacturer or seller may be held liable. California law provides for strict liability for defective products. This means that a plaintiff does not have to prove that the manufacturer was negligent. He or she need only prove the existence of the defect and the causal connection between the defect and the injury. In addition, distributors and retailers may also be liable under certain circumstances.
To increase the chances of a successful case, it is important to gather and preserve as much evidence as possible. This includes:
The more complete the information provided, the greater the likelihood of a successful claim.
The statute of limitations under California law should be considered. Typically, an injured person has two years from the date of injury to file a personal injury lawsuit. If the product has a defect, the time frame may change. Missing the statute of limitations may result in the loss of your right to recover damages, so it is important to act in a timely manner.
Because garage door injury cases can involve multiple sides of a cause of action, legal assistance is crucial. The attorneys at KAASS LAW are experienced in handling these types of cases and will help determine the best strategy to protect the injured party's interests.
If you or a loved one have been injured in a garage door accident, we invite you to contact our office at (310) 943-1171 for a free consultation with a Los Angeles garage door personal injury lawyer. Our attorneys will help you determine the liable party and proceed accordingly.
When the drunk driver’s impairment is the cause of the crash, they are completely liable for the accident. However, the driver could be drunk but follow traffic laws, and the other driver’s actions could cause the crash. For example, you may have failed to brake in time and hit a drunk driver’s car from behind. In that case, you are liable for the accident. The police will charge the other driver with a DUI, but that won't change your fault in the accident if the driver’s drunken impairment didn’t cause the crash. If it was your wrong action that ultimately caused the accident, you are at fault, regardless of the other driver’s impairment. If their drunken impairment did not cause the accident, it will most likely not be a factor in deciding liability.
California follows comparative negligence, allowing both parties to share fault in an accident based on their level of responsibility. In such cases, the settlement amount recovered to cover losses will be much lower. For example, you may have been looking at your phone while you were driving and a drunk driver swerved out of their lane and side swiped your car. In such a case, both parties will most likely share fault because both parties’ actions contributed to the accident. If you hadn't used your phone and the driver hadn't swerved while impaired, the accident would not have occurred. If you are partly at fault in your accident, our Los Angeles Personal Injury attorneys can help you figure out what percentage of the accident was your fault. You can still recover losses, but the amount will reduce by the percentage of your fault in the accident. So if you were 90% at fault, you can still receive 10% of your damages as compensation.
It is important to realize that the presence of alcohol in the driver's blood does not automatically make him or her the sole perpetrator of the accident. In order to determine fault, it is necessary to conduct a thorough investigation of all the circumstances surrounding the accident. The key factor in determining liability is causation. Between the driver's actions and the resulting consequences. In accident cases, courts and insurance companies analyze evidence such as:
If it is proven that the injured party's actions were also negligent, the amount of compensation may be reduced. This is especially true in California where comparative negligence applies.
Even if you are partially at fault for an accident, you may still be entitled to recover damages. These may include:
The amount of your payout will depend on the extent of your liability. For example, if you were found to be 30% at fault, you could receive 70% of your total damages.
Legal help is especially important in cases involving drunk drivers, as these cases often involve emotional distress and complex legal nuances. Attorneys can help you present the facts correctly, protect your interests, and seek fair compensation.
If you or a loved one has been in an accident involving a drunk driver, contact KAASS LAW (310) 943-1171 for a free consultation. Our attorneys will evaluate the details of your case and let you know what to expect and how you can proceed. Our team speaks English, Spanish, Russian, and Armenian.
Civil negligence can take many different forms, and can also be quite hard to identify at times. A few examples to help better understand civil negligence include:
Each state has its own criminal laws that decide what can be considered criminally negligent. Criminal negligence can be punishable with jail time. Some examples of criminal negligence include:
The legal consequences of civil and criminal negligence are very different. Civil negligence results in monetary compensation for the plaintiff, as the primary goal is to recover damages. This is accomplished through a civil lawsuit, which usually requires the defendant to pay for the injured person's damages or medical expenses. Criminal negligence can lead to more serious consequences, including criminal prosecution. In this case, the consequences may include:
The main purpose of a criminal case is to punish the defendant for the crime committed and to protect society. This is important to understand. In order to be held criminally liable, it must be proven that the defendant's actions were indifferent to the risk. Unlike civil liability, where proof of harm is sufficient, criminal liability depends on the degree of danger and negligence. If you have been the victim of civil or criminal negligence, it is important to seek legal help. At KAASS LAW, our attorneys can help you understand your situation and offer you the best solution. The sooner you come forward, the better chance you have of successfully resolving your case.
If you or a loved one has been in an accident or suffered any kind of injury as a result of another person’s negligence, contact our Los Angeles Personal Injury attorneys. KAASS LAW at (310) 943-1171 for a free consultation. Our attorneys will evaluate the details of your case and let you know what to expect and how you can proceed. Our team speaks English, Spanish, and Armenian.
Horse wagering, including pari-mutuel wagering, falls under California Horse Racing Law and the California Business and Professions Code. The Californian Lottery runs the only authorized lottery in the state of California.
Under Penal Code 330 PC it is a misdemeanor offense to:
The minimum age to gamble in California is 18 years, though some casinos have a minimum age of entry which is 21 years.
California does not separately regulate online gambling. Thus, there is no special licensing regime for online gambling.
Businesses and individuals engaged in gambling activities in California are subject to strict state regulation. The California Gambling Control Commission has the authority to impose administrative sanctions for violations of the Gambling Control Act. Such sanctions include:
Liability applies to both licensees and employees of gambling establishments. Individuals involved in illegal gambling activities may also be subject to criminal penalties. Under California Penal Code Section 330 PC, it is a misdemeanor to:
This offense is classified as a misdemeanor and may result in a fine, arrest, or other sanction as determined by the court.
It is also important to note that third parties, including landlords who provide the premises, can be held liable. The California Business and Professions Code considers advertising illegal gambling a misdemeanor. While advertising for legal gambling activities is not prohibited, it must comply with general advertising requirements. These include a prohibition against misleading information. Authorities may impose fines and take civil action if parties fail to meet these standards.
The California Gambling Control Commission, Horse Racing Board, and Lottery Commission have not issued separate acts regarding gambling advertisements. Thus, the California Business and Professions Code regulates gambling advertisements under its general advertising regime. If you or a loved one would like more information on California wagering and gambling laws we invite you to contact KAASS LAW (310) 943-1171 today. The sooner you come forward, the better chance you have of successfully resolving your case.
Several ways exist to prosecute a hate crime. Under Penal Code 422.6 PC, it is a crime for a person to commit a hate crime. Additionally, there are other penal codes that pertain to sentence enhancing or additional penalties. For example, under Penal Code 422.75 PC, additional penalties apply on an individual when: 1) they are convicted of a misdemeanor, or 2) that misdemeanor is also proven to be a hate crime. Also, Penal Code 422.7 PC imposes sentencing enhancement on an accused if: 1) they are convicted of a felony, and 2) that felony is also proven to be a hate crime.
Under California law, the commission of a hate crime is considered a misdemeanor, which is punishable by: 1) imprisonment in a county jail for up to one (1) year, and/or 2) a maximum fine of $5,000. However, should an individual commit a crime that is proven to also be a hate crime, then that individual can be charged with a felony and get a penalty enhancement, as mentioned above for up to three (3) years.
A battery cause of action for transmission of a sexually transmitted disease involves the defendant’s intentional, unconsented and harmful contact with the plaintiff. In an STD case, while the plaintiff may consent to sexual contact, he is not consenting to a contact accompanied by the known risk of contracting an STD. Moreover, it is not necessary that the defendant had a specific intent to transmit the STD - going forward with sexual contact with the knowledge that transmission could occur is enough. For a civil battery claim, the victim must prove that the defendant knew he infected with an STD or was likely to have one.
In order to prove fraud, the plaintiff must establish the following:
A person who knowingly and intentionally fails to disclose their sexually transmitted disease to a sexual partner can face liability for any injuries the partner sustains.
A person who contracts an STD experience suffers emotional distress, including guilt, depression, anxiety, humiliation, or even self-destructive thoughts. An injured person can recover damages for such emotional distress and hold the person with STD legally liable. A claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress for transmitting an STD often accompanies another legal theory, such as negligence. This is because demonstrating the elements of emotional distress and determining damages is usually very difficult.
Generally, the law strictly prohibits disclosing another person's HIV status, except in limited situations such as court cases or medical procedures. A violation of the statute can provide grounds for a civil lawsuit.
To better understand the complexities of STI liability in California, it is important to consider additional legal considerations. One possible defense in STI transmission cases is that the defendant did not know he or she was infected. Under California law, a person cannot be prosecuted for STI transmission if he or she did not know that he or she was infected. This is especially true in cases where a person carries the infection unknowingly or has no symptoms. However, it is worth noting that even if the defendant did not know they were infected, they can still be held liable. If the facts show that he or she should have been aware of the risk of transmitting the disease. In such situations, the key point is that the defendant should have taken all possible steps. to ensure that he or she was healthy before engaging in sexual intercourse.
In some cases, the court can establish liability for transmitting an STD even without intent to infect a partner. California law allows liability even in situations where the infected person did not intend to transmit the infection. But was aware of the risk of infection and continued sexual relations anyway. This is an important consideration in understanding how the law may interpret the actions of individuals who have sex despite the potential risk.
Medical evidence and test results play a key role in STI transmission cases. If the defendant or victim tests positive for an STI, the court can use this as evidence. It is also important to keep in mind that refusing to undergo medical testing can be perceived as strengthening the evidence against the accused. This can seriously affect the outcome of the case, as the court will consider whether a party concealed or withheld information. This may lead to additional charges of fraud or negligence. If you are a victim of STI transmission, contact KAASS LAW for counseling on this issue.
In civil lawsuits, the plaintiff may claim the following damages, including:
Depending on what the exemption level is at the time of someone’s passing, the death tax may or may not be owed. For younger individuals who have not yet perhaps established their careers, the thought of owning millions seems impossible. However, with a long life ahead, the idea is not so unimaginable as to achieving financial success that is more than the estate tax exemption.
Taking steps now while the exemption is high is a great idea as to ensure financial security for beneficiaries. For example, placing shares of a successful business or real estate into a trust can shield them from the death tax. Take for instance setting up a domestic trust. This is an idea to consider because one can shield a portion of their assets from death taxes in this way. For example, Sally decides to open a new business that over time becomes worth $13 million. Sally should set up a revocable trust and place 45% of her business shares into this trust for tax protection. Upon Sally's death, she will only owe 55% of the business shares and avoid exceeding the exemption level. KAASS LAW can help you navigate death taxes and protect your estate.
Under California product liability laws, the warning of harm or risk of injury must be:
The manufacturer/distributor is under a duty to stay informed about its product and he can't escape legal liability for a failure to warn just because he was uninformed of the risk. In case the manufacturer/distributor could have discovered the risk through investigation, research, or testing he will be liable for failing to warn the consumer about a risk he should have reasonably known about. Furthermore, if any new information is discovered, it is also the manufacturer's responsibility to warn consumers that have already purchased a product about the new risks.
Under California’s statute of limitations, the plaintiff generally has two years from the date of the injury to bring the claim against the manufacturer/distributor. This period can be extended in case:
The plaintiff can be able to recover the following:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6GTQa0qmH0&ab_channel=KaassLaw