California Politician’s Wife, Son OK after Fatal Car Accident

The wife and son of former California Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado were reportedly doing fine following the fatal car crash Monday in which they figured.

The two only suffered minor injuries, while the 30-year-old driver of the vehicle that struck their car was declared dead.

According to reports, a 1985 Honda Accord bound North of Dominion Road failed to halt at an intersection stop sign, as a result of which, it was struck by Maldonado’s 2008 Cadillac Escalade on its front left portion. Both vehicles came to a stop in an irrigation canal of the north side of Foxen Canyon Road.

The Accord’s driver was not immediately identified by California Highway Patrol (CHP) authorities, while Maldonado and her son were transported to the Marian Regional Medical Center in Santa Maria via private vehicle. After several precautionary examinations for the injuries they sustained, the two were immediately released and are now okay.

Apparently, the Honda car driver was at fault for the accident, but still, Maldonado’s family is sending their deepest condolences and sympathies to the family of the victim.

At present, former Lt. Gov. Maldonado, a Republican is running for the 24th Congressional District seat against Democrat Lois Capps.

Beating the red light or running a stop sign is the most common cause of accidents in intersections. Therefore, drivers should strictly observe traffic rules and regulations in areas with or near intersections.

Each year, the number of car accidents that occur in the state of California reaches to tens of thousands. In some circumstances, a victim sustains serious injuries and other significant losses or damages as a result of car accident that happened due to other people’s negligence. In such case, the victim may have the right to file claims for damages, according to a Los Angeles car accident attorney.

Millionaire Crashed His 1962 Ferrari GTO: World’s Most Expensive Car Crash

The world’s most expensive car crash happened just recently when American investor and millionaire, Christopher Cox, crashed his 1962 Ferrari GTO during a Ferrari rally in France a couple of weeks ago.

According to reports, while Cox and his wife were riding the said car, another car from behind struck them and damaged the car’s front end. Cox and his wife are now fine after being treated for minor injuries.

In 1976, Cox’s car had been involved in a car crash. Experts say that if a car is properly restored, its damages will not necessarily affect its value, particularly in the circumstance of a very rare Ferrari 250 GTO. However, the total amount of the crash remains to be undetermined at present. Experts speculated that damages could amount to a million dollars.

Cox bought his Ferrari GTO way back in 2005. The car is considered as the “Picasso” of the auto industry and a true work of art of prized rareness. Only 38 of its kind were built between 1962 and 1964. Ferrari founder, Enzo Ferrari, in fact personally selected and approved of the original buyers of the limited units.

Reports said that Cox’s Ferrari was colored red before but was repainted baby blue with a canary-yellow racing stripe down the middle in 1963. Such color coordination was applied to honor Swedish race car driver Ulf Norinder.

Several auction experts and car collectors said that most high-end collectible vehicles are insured with special “collector” or “hobby” policies. Said policies usually limit the owner from driving the car. Owner can only drive their cars to car shows and rallies. The policies usually don’t cover vehicle accidents or damages incurred during daily use, like for commuting or grocery trips.

Consequently, a Los Angeles injury attorney suggests owners of such high-end and collectible vehicles to take extra good car when taking their rides on the road. If owners want to preserve their investment, then it would be best to keep such pricey cars in their garage. Unfortunately, they can’t definitely find fun with that.

Employment Discrimination Prevalent among Overweight Women

In a recent study, it was found out that overweight women are more likely to suffer employment discrimination when trying to get a job and be paid less than their slimmer colleagues.

Generally, overweight women are prone to health problems such as heart ailments and diabetes. And, aside from the health risks, they are also struggling to overcome the discrimination they are facing during employment.

Researchers at the University of Manchester and Monash University, Melbourne concluded that overweight women are more likely to experience discrimination when hunting for a job up to hiring and employment decision.

The said study involved 95 people acting as employers, who were shown different resumes and headshot photos of job applicants. The researchers then asked the “employers” to rate the applicants based on their employability, starting salary, and potential for job advancement.

The researchers concealed the true reason for the study to the “employers” to avoid unfair decision. The resumes shown by the researchers to the employers have equivalent skills, experience, and education as well.

The employers did not know that the photos attached to the resumes were photos of the same six women before and after weight loss surgery.

The study thereby concluded that overweight women received more negative responses on employment, predicted success, possibility to receive higher salary, perfect employment rating, and rank order of preference as compared to other slimmer applicants.

According to the study’s lead author, Dr. Kerry O’Brien, they found that strong obesity discrimination was prevalent all over job selection criteria like starting salary, leadership skills, and possibility of selecting an obese candidate for the job.

Apparently, the problem regarding the prevailing employment discrimination against overweight women needs to be given proper attention. Therefore, to reduce such prejudices, a California employment discrimination lawyer suggested that comprehensive policies should be introduced into the labor industry.

San Francisco Giants Fan’s Premise Liability Lawsuit Seeks $50 Million in Damages

The San Francisco Giants fan, Bryan Stow, who was attacked by two men in the parking lot of the said stadium on March 31, 2011 after the team’s opening-day victory over the Giants, is now suing the former Dodger Stadium owner, Frank McCourt and 13 other team entities.

In his premise liability lawsuit, Stow is seeking $50 million in damages for his future medical costs and pain and suffering.

According to court documents, Stow suffered brain injury and is now permanently disabled. Stow’s medication had in fact incurred $4.3 million in medical bills so far and will need additional $50 million plus.

The lawsuit was filed on May 24 before the Los Angeles Superior Court. Among Stow’s claims are assault, battery, negligence, negligent hiring, and both intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

In a previous trial, two men identified as Louie Sanchez, 30, and Marvin Norwood, 31, were ordered to appear in court for the beating of Stow. During the trial, the Los Angeles Superior Court judge, George Lomeli found enough evidence to order both men to proceed to trial on one felony count each of chaos, assault by means possibly to produce severe personal injury, and life-threatening battery.

Furthermore, the court judge also found enough evidence which involves an allegation that Sanchez had personally inflicted severe personal injury against Stow, while with Norwoods, the judge found no sufficient evidence to support the allegations set against the latter.

At present, both men remain in jail and are scheduled to appear on Friday at the downtown Los Angeles court house for arraignment.

In relation to this incident, property owners can be held liable for any injuries caused by accidents that happen on their property or within the premises of their property. If a person was injured while on someone else’s property, the victim may have all the legal rights to file for a premise liability claim against the property owner and other parties involved in the incident.

According to a Los Angeles premise liability lawyer, although such premise liability claims are considered personal injury claims, they present their own problems and one of a kind evidence issues.