Roseville Immigration Law

Omar Ameen, the Sacramento refugee accused by the federal government of being a commander for the Islamic State group, appeared in court via video for an immigration hearing in Southern California on Thursday.

Ameen was accused of being a member of the Islamic State group, lying on his refugee application and of murdering an Iraqi police officer. The government's case hinged largely on supposed eyewitnesses who say he led the convoy into the Rawah district of Iraq's Al-Anbar province.

But a KCRA 3 investigation showed that defense attorneys, after two years of intense negotiations and travel to Turkey, obtained what his public defender called "obliterating evidence." Cellphone data, cell tower "pings" and eyewitness testimony put him in Mersin, Turkey, within the hour of the Iraqi police officer's murder.

In a 30-page memorandum and order from U.S. Magistrate Judge Edmund Brennan in Sacramento, the court said that it did not seem possible that Ameen killed the officer in Iraq as evidence showed he was in Turkey. Brennan said the government's version of events made "little sense," and ordered Ameen to be released from federal custody immediately.

Instead of being returned to his family, Ameen was taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, where he's been held in Bakersfield on essentially the same charges Judge Brennan cleared him of in April.

More Immigration Law News

Border crisis: GOP senator introduces bill allowing local police to enforce immigration laws

Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville warns of 'total chaos' without immigration law enforcement

Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a first-term Republican senator from Alabama, is introducing a bill to give state and local law enforcement more jurisdiction over illegal immigration cases, as the crisis at the southern border continues to escalate.

Tuberville spoke with Fox News on Tuesday about his Empowering Law Enforcement Act, which he is introducing with fellow GOP Sens. Thom Tillis, S.C., and Mike Rounds, S.D. He said the bill is needed because the Biden administration is targeting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and looking to "close them down or really, really cut their power."

"Our local police across the country, as we speak, they don’t have, really, any authority with illegal immigration," Tuberville told Fox News. "And we need to find some way to be able to give our local law enforcement all across the country the ability to arrest, to identify, and then have some way to have jurisdiction over people who are not citizens of our country."

Court rules against government on technical question of notice requirement in immigration law The Supreme Court on Thursday issued a 6-3 opinion in Niz-Chavez v. Garland, reversing a lower court’s decision that had limited access to “cancellation of removal,” an important form of relief for noncitizens in deportation proceedings.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion, adopting a rigid interpretation of a federal statute that requires the government to serve a “notice to appear” in order to trigger the “stop-time” rule. That rule can foreclose access to immigration relief by preventing noncitizens from accruing the time required for eligibility. According to the majority, in order to trigger the stop-time rule, the government must issue a single immigration charging document with various pieces of required information, including the date and time of the hearing. The majority rejected the government’s contention that a series of documents could together comprise the required notice, noting that the plain language of the law, as well as its structure and history, indicate a single document is required.

The voting line-up was unusual. Gorsuch’s majority opinion was joined by the court’s three liberals – Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan – as well as two other conservatives – Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a dissent, which was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito.

There will be no new immigration law under Biden, unless he changes course

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is reportedly considering an end run around the regular legislative process. He wants to pass an immigration reform bill that would legalize millions of undocumented immigrants, but he hasn’t been able to get the 10 Republican votes he needs to overcome a Republican filibuster.

The filibuster could be eliminated with a simple majority vote, but that would require all 50 Democratic Senators to vote for eliminating it, and two of them — Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) — are opposed.

Sen. Manchin has said that if the filibuster is eliminated, “a new and dangerous precedent will be set to pass sweeping, partisan legislation that changes the direction of our nation every time there is a change in political control.”

Roseville Workers' Comp

Ahmad Zaki Noori, 41, of Sacramento, Calif., was arraigned on two felony counts of workers’ compensation insurance fraud after allegedly misrepresenting symptoms following a work-related injury in order to receive $21,000 in undeserved benefits.

On July 16, 2019, Noori, while working as a welder, sustained a head injury and contusions on multiple parts of his body. Following his injury, a workers’ comp claim was filed with his employer’s insurance company and Noori began receiving payments. Following the injury, Noori reportedly presented himself as someone with severe amnesia and as someone who had difficulty performing daily functions of living, like speaking, walking or driving.

An investigation by the California Department of Insurance reportedly showed Noori misrepresented his symptoms to medical professionals and those handling his claim. Undercover surveillance showed Noori speaking, walking, and driving – all functions he claimed not to be able to do as a result of the injury. The surveillance also reportedly showed him performing duties at an automobile dismantling yard, like loading items onto a flatbed trailer and changing a spare tire.

Noori reportedly received $21,000 in workers’ comp payments and his employers’ insurance company lost an additional $80,679 in medical, legal and investigation costs.

Noori was arrested at his residence on April 13. He is scheduled to return to court on May 20. The case is being prosecuted by the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office.

More Workers' Comp News

Jefferson County woman now battling for workers’ comp after surviving COVID-19

While the number of COVID-19 cases is down in Tennessee, those that contracted the virus are still fighting both the physical and financial effects.

At 45, Keniethea Tadlock had always been healthy. But last September she was admitted to Jefferson Memorial Hospital diagnosed with COVID-19, for three weeks she struggled to survive.

Many of these “COVID long-haulers” have a condition called post-COVID-19 syndrome. Tadlock is one of those still fighting the effects of the virus. The diagnosis was made by her doctor.

“From the COVID, I am still in organ failure, my heart, my lungs, and my kidneys,” Tadlock said. “I have been hit pretty hard.”

Tadlock has also been hit hard financially and received more than a thousand pages of medical bills.

“I owe the hospital $473,000 and some odd change now,” she said. “And that is just the hospital.”

Keneithea’s condition is what the American Medical Association calls a “COVID long-hauler.” She suffers from chronic pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, anxiety, depression, and insomnia.

“I have fear of sleeping because I’m afraid I’m going to die in my sleep,” Tadlock said.

“One day it’ll be good and the next day when she gets up and she’ll be down for two or three days,” her husband Steve Blankenship said.

Kenietha worked at this office in Halls for a regional propane gas supply company, Blossman Gas. She’s filed a claim with the state Bureau of Workers’ Compensation against her former employer alleging she got the virus at work.

“The burden is going to be on us to prove anything about it, that it was caused at work,” Blankenship said. “All that is going to be on us.”

Keniethea said the first worker’s comp hearing last week did not go well. She said the attorney representing Blossman’s insurance company wanted documentation of her illness.

“They said they had not gotten any form of paper saying that I was positive for COVID-19 whatsoever,” Keniethea said. “It says diagnosis on admission. COVID-19, pneumonia, acute respiratory failure.”

“With all the correspondence we have had with them between emails, me trying to get her short-term disability going, I don’t see how they couldn’t have known,” Blankenship said.

While the odds may be against her in receiving workers’ compensation benefits, Tadlock says she looks forward to the next hearing as her former employer has the next few months to examine her medical records.

“We are supposed to get together, and we’re supposed to all talk this out to see if they’re going to agree or not, whether or not they’re going to pay,” Keniethea said.

We reached out to the insurance company that represents Tadlock’s former employer. The legal team said it does not publicly comment on matters under litigation.

Tadlock’s next hearing before the workers’ compensation board is in early August. Her short-term disability ended in March. The couple is unsure how they will pay for their medical expenses.

Florida Man Accused of Failing to Pay $193K in Workers’ Comp Premium

A Florida man has been arrested for workers’ compensation premium fraud and additional charges for allegedly concealing payroll information to avoid paying more than $193,000 in workers’ compensation premiums, according to a statement from the Florida Department of Financial Services.

Julio Enrique Maldonado, owner of G.G.M. Construction LLC, faces charges of workers compensation fraud, under reporting payroll greater than $100,000, workers compensation fraud – false statements on application greater than $100,000, and Florida communication fraud aggregated value of $50,000 or more.

The charges follow an investigation by the DFS Division of Investigative & Forensic Services (DIFS), Bureau of Workers Compensation Fraud that found Maldonado claimed $120,000 in annual payroll to Builders Insurance Co. for the policy periods of February 2018 to November 2019. Due to the estimated annual payroll provided, the estimated premium calculated for the policy period was $15,780.

During the investigation, detectives discovered that Maldonado cashed several checks from January 2019 through December 2020, which totaled over $5.5 million. Maldonado did not respond to the request from Builders Insurance Company to conduct an audit. Based on Maldonado grossly underestimating/reporting his business payroll, Builders Insurance Company, was deprived of $193,284 in premiums, DFS said.

Maldonado was arrested on April 30, 2021 and booked into the Orange County Jail. If convicted, he faces up to 30 years in prison. Individuals charged with a crime are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

“This type of fraud has a major impact on our state as it raises insurance rates for Florida families. I appreciate the hard work of my fraud detectives for bringing this alleged fraudster to justice,” Patronis said.

Minnesota extends workers' comp for first responders hit by COVID-19

Ill front-line employees get presumption they got it on job until end of 2021.

A woman, having a suspected COVID-19 related medical emergency, was helped by emergency first responders in the north Twin Cities metro in December.

First responders and front-line health care workers who contract COVID-19 will be presumed eligible for workers' compensation for eight more months, under a bill signed into law this week by Gov. Tim Walz.

Normally, workers in Minnesota must establish that they were injured on the job to collect workers' compensation for missed time and/or medical expenses. But proving that they contracted a potentially lethal virus circulating in the general public while on the job can be difficult, if not impossible.

To prevent first responders and health care workers from facing financial disruption should they contract COVID, lawmakers passed a temporary law last year saying such workers are presumed to have been exposed to COVID at work for the purposes of obtaining workers' compensation. That shifted the responsibility to the employer to prove the infection happened elsewhere.

The presumption was set to end on May 1, but Walz on Monday signed an extension through Dec. 31. It covers doctors, nurses, firefighters, paramedics, police, long-term care workers, home health care workers, correctional officers and child care providers.

It doesn't extend to teachers or grocery store workers, who were not included under the temporary law passed last year.

Minnesota is one of about 15 states with a COVID-19 workers' compensation presumption for first responders and health care workers.

Personal Injury

To Capitol insiders, the term “tort wars” is shorthand for decades of political wrangling over the rules governing lawsuits for personal injuries — who can sue and collect damages for which actions.

The rules are a mix of legislation and appellate court interpretations, and with untold billions of dollars at stake, lawyers who specialize in personal injury lawsuits and their political allies, such as unions and consumer advocates, clash constantly with business groups and insurers.

The former seek to expand opportunities to sue and the latter resist such expansions and occasionally try to narrow the scope of liability.

Over the decades, the conflict has generated some memorable events. In 1975, for instance, a newly inaugurated Gov. Jerry Brown signed a landmark law, dubbed MICRA, that imposed tight limits on “pain and suffering” damages in medical malpractice cases. Next year, nearly a half-century later, California voters will decide whether the $250,000 cap should remain in place or be lifted, the latest of many attempts to undo the 1975 law.

A particularly colorful episode occurred in 1987, when lobbyists for personal injury lawyers and rival interests negotiated an armistice, finalized at Frank Fat’s restaurant in Sacramento with its provisions jotted down on a napkin. The “napkin deal,” as it came to be known, reduced liability for harmful products, such as cigarettes, and gave lawyers higher fees in medical malpractice cases.

The truce was short-lived, however, and the warring factions soon resumed hostilities in the Legislature and in ballot measures. Tort wars are a subset of the perpetual conflict that pits business, insurance and employer interests against unions, trial lawyers, consumer advocates and environmental groups over a broad array of specific issues.

The Civil Justice Association of Sacramento, California, a business-backed lobby that does battle with Consumer Attorneys of California and other pro-lawsuit interests, has issued a list of bills it says would “threaten to undermine fairness and balance in the state’s civil justice system.”

Most would create “private rights of action,” empowering lawyers to enforce new state laws through lawsuits. One example is Assembly Bill 95, carried by Assemblyman Evan Low, a Cupertino Democrat, that would require employers with 25 or more employees to provide 10 days of paid bereavement leave, and allow lawsuits to enforce it.

Employers see the threat of such lawsuits, with potentially heavy damages, as a tool to extract concessions and earn fat fees for lawyers. However, advocates say private rights of action are needed to discourage employers from flouting the law.

It’s not the first time that tort wars have generated strange bedfellows.

CalMatters is a public interest journalism venture committed to explaining how California’s state Capitol works and why it matters.

More Personal Injury News

Florida Repeals State’s No-Fault Personal Injury Protection>/h3> Until recently, Florida has had a Personal Injury Protection (PIP) insurance system, also known as “no-fault insurance.” The intention of PIP was to provide injured drivers immediate medical coverage instead of establishing fault through the court system.

The primary goals of PIP were to reduce delays in payment for injured drivers and limit the weight on the court system. In Florida, PIP coverage was required to be purchased by all vehicle owners registered in the state. The coverage made individuals responsible for their own injuries suffered due to an accident, regardless of fault.

Senate Bill 54
The passage of Senate Bill 54 repeals the state’s no-fault PIP system and instead requires bodily injury coverage starting at $25,000 for all Florida drivers. Although earlier versions of the bill required insurers to offer medical payments coverage (MedPay) in the amount of $5,000 or $10,000, the passed version makes the offering optional and includes an optional $5,000 MedPay death benefit.

The bill will also entirely overhaul the framework under which motor vehicle claims are handled and address third-party bad-faith failures to settle actions against insurance carriers.

Bill sponsor Danny Burgess contends that a study from Florida’s Office of Insurance Regulations (OIR) demonstrated how rates would be reduced if PIP was repealed in Florida. He stated that the provisions addressing bad faith will also help stop fraud that has been all too common with PIP and therefore lead to even further rate reductions.

Opposition to Bill 54
Senator Jeff Brandes, one of three senators who opposed the bill, said that studies regarding how exactly the bill would lower rates have been insufficient. Specifically, Brandes stated that “Florida already has some of the highest rates in the country, and unfortunately if you are just struggling to make it… [and] buying just PIP today, rates will go up 40%.”

The American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA), an insurance trade group, also opposed the bill, stating it may increase the state’s current 20% uninsured rate. The APCIA further noted that its analysis shows the bill could increase the cost of the average auto insurance policy by as much as 23% and that drivers who carry the lowest levels of coverage could see increases as high as $805 per year. The APCIA said more than 28,000 letters were sent to lawmakers opposing the bill and is encouraging the governor to veto the legislation.

Pursuing A Personal Injury Claim? Keep A Diary So You Don't Forget. Here's How.

If you have recently been injured in a car or truck accident or other personal injury event, it is a disorienting time. You may be simultaneously grappling with insurance companies, doctors, therapists and lawyers. Then there is getting your vehicle appraised and repaired, obtaining a rental car and clearing absence from work with your employer.

If you have a capable lawyer some of this burden can be reduced but certainly not all of it. Some injuries, for example concussions, in and of themselves make thinking harder. Medications too can make you sleepy or less attentive. Not surprisingly, this can serve to inhibit your later recollection of events.

That can be problematic. Insurance companies regard time as being on their side. You need the money and they have the money. The longer the process goes on the less you will remember about the basic facts of the case, which can lead to testimony that is inaccurate and at odds with the physical facts or other evidence.

Testimony that is wrong or limited by the vagaries of memory can compromise the prospect of receiving compensation. So what is a personal injury victim to do?

The answer is keep a diary. It doesn't have to be an old-fashioned written diary but it also can be. It may be a pain to do so but the value of it is difficult to overestimate. You can use your phone or a calendar or a pad of paper, The means isn't as important as the data you keep.

Missouri legislature passes new protections for businesses from COVID-19 suits

While somewhat late to the starting gate, Missouri has now joined a score of other states in adopting a law designed to provide liability protections for employers, product manufacturers, and health care providers from personal injury lawsuits associated with contracting, or the fear of contracting, COVID-19. This law, SB 51, takes effect August 28, 2021, if signed by the Governor.

Highlights are:

The bill creates a new statutory cause of action for COVID-19 personal injury suits that preempts other statutory and common law causes of action which could be used to assert a claim for liability (such as negligence, intentional torts, etc.).

Employers and other businesses are not liable for personal injury suits unless they engaged in conduct constituting recklessness (a voluntary conscious act or omission in reckless disregard of the consequences or a legal duty) or willful misconduct (an act or omission taken intentionally to achieve a wrongful purpose; or in disregard of a known or obvious risk that is so great as to make it highly probable that the harm will outweigh the benefit).

The person suing for damages must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the employer’s act or omission actually caused the person to be exposed to COVID-19 and that actual exposure caused the person to suffer a personal injury.

The bill creates a rebuttable presumption that persons entering the employer’s premises assume the risk of COVID-19 exposure if the employer posts a statutory notice at the entrance to the facility.

\

Workers Compensation Fraud

California, workers’ compensation fraud involves providing false or misleading information in order to obtain benefits to which you are not legally entitled. The crime can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony and carries penalties of up to 5 years in jail or prison. “Workers’ compensation” is a system of insurance that provides medical care and payments for lost income to workers who are injured on the job.1 Fraud committed in connection with workers’ compensation insurance can lead to harsh criminal penalties. Acts that are considered workers’ compensation fraud in California include: Knowingly making or presenting a false or fraudulent material statement for the purpose of either obtaining or denying workers’ compensation benefits; Making a false or fraudulent statement about eligibility for benefits in order to discourage an injured worker from claiming benefits; Knowingly aiding and abetting, or participating in a conspiracy to commit, workers’ compensation fraud; Preparing or submitting multiple claims for payment of a health care benefit covered by workers’ compensation insurance, all for the same injury; Submitting a claim for a health care benefit covered by workers’ comp that was not actually used; and Soliciting, referring or accepting any business from a person, knowing that s/he intends to commit workers’ comp fraud.

Tax Day Moved to May17

Tax filing is a little more complicated this year.

The deadline to file a 2020 individual federal return and pay any tax owed has been extended to May 17, about a month later than the typical April deadline. The Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service moved the date to give filers, tax preparers and the I.R.S. itself more time to adjust to disruptions from the coronavirus pandemic.

Most states are following the extended federal deadlines, and a few have adopted even more generous extensions.

But the I.R.S. has not postponed the deadline for making first-quarter 2021 estimated tax payments, as it did last year when it delayed Tax Day because of the pandemic. This year, the first estimated tax deadline remains April 15. Some members of Congress are pushing for the I.R.S. to reconcile the deadlines, but it’s unclear whether that will happen, with April 15 less than a week away.

“It just creates confusion,” said Mark A. Stewart Jr., a certified public accountant and president of the National Conference of CPA Practitioners.

Most states have retained their usual deadlines for first-quarter estimated taxes. One exception is Maryland, which moved both its filing deadline and the deadline for first- and second-quarter estimated tax payments to July 15.

The I.R.S. continues to grapple with pandemic challenges. Filers are seeing “more refund delays” than usual this year, according to an online update on March 25 from the Taxpayer Advocate Service, an independent office within the I.R.S. that represents taxpayers.

The number of returns processed by the I.R.S. as of April 2 was down about 10 percent from a year earlier, according to statistics provided by the agency. But the start of this year’s tax season was delayed to allow the agency to update and test its systems to reflect tax changes approved by Congress late last year. The number of returns processed on comparable days of the season is up about 3 percent, the agency reported.

The agency is “on track when you consider that this tax season started late,” an I.R.S. spokesman, Eric Smith, said in an email.

Last year, a shutdown because of the pandemic left the I.R.S. with a backlog of unprocessed paper tax returns. This year, even with the late start to the tax season, the agency is still struggling to deal with the 2019 paper returns, along with a crush of 2020 returns, I.R.S. “resource” issues and technology problems, the advocate service said.

The advocate service said the I.R.S. was also having to “manually verify” large numbers of rebate credits, which taxpayers can claim to obtain the first and second round of federal stimulus payments, if they haven’t already received them.

In addition, the agency has had to recalculate refunds for filers who reported unemployment benefits last year. The latest round of pandemic relief legislation, which became law on March 11, made the first $10,200 of unemployment benefits tax-free for many Americans. But some had already filed returns when the tax break became available, so they will get a refund of any overpayment — probably beginning in May.

On Wednesday, the I.R.S. posted an update on its website, saying it had about 16.5 million unprocessed individual returns “in the pipeline,” including two million received before 2021.

Most people have income taxes withheld from their paychecks. If they overpay, they get money back as a refund when they file their return. But those who don’t have taxes automatically withheld — including self-employed people or workers who have two jobs and don’t have taxes withheld from both checks — generally have to pay taxes to the I.R.S. four times a year. Other income that isn’t subject to withholding includes alimony, interest and dividends, and taxes on the sale of stocks or other investments. Nearly 10 million filers paid estimated taxes in 2018, the I.R.S. said.

The earlier deadline for the estimated tax payment makes the tax return filing extension less helpful than it should be for quarterly payers, tax experts say. The amount of estimated tax to be paid is typically calculated based on the previous year’s tax return, and the first installment is normally paid when the tax return is filed.

How Has the Pandemic Changed Your Taxes?

So if people haven’t completed their 2020 returns yet, they will have to estimate what they must pay in 2021 — and could face underpayment penalties at tax time next year if they pay too little over the course of the year. (The penalty is based on how much you owe, and how long you have owed it, according to TurboTax.) They may still be charged a penalty if they are late with estimated payments, even if they are due a refund when they file their tax return, the I.R.S. says.

Some people may not realize they have to make the first estimated payment before their 2020 return is due, Mr. Stewart said.

“They hear Tax Day is moved to May 17, so a lot of people will go to their preparer on April 30,” Mr. Stewart said. “Unfortunately, the first-quarter estimated payment is late.”

The conference and other groups representing tax professionals had urged the government to postpone the estimated tax deadline as well. In congressional committee testimony in March, the I.R.S. commissioner, Charles P. Rettig, said the estimated tax deadline hadn’t been changed because it would, in effect, be giving “a break” on interest and penalties to wealthy people, who would invest the money instead of paying the government.

But people who file estimated taxes also include sole proprietors and workers in the gig economy with modest incomes, accountants say. Many people who lost jobs in the pandemic switched to work delivering meals and groceries ordered by mobile apps, said Melanie Lauridsen, senior manager for tax policy and advocacy at the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.

“That’s where the need is,” Ms. Lauridsen said.

The disconnect between the filing and estimated tax deadlines means tax preparers are pushed to get returns done by the traditional deadline anyway. “It’s putting a tremendous amount of stress on tax preparers,” said Rhonda Collins, director of tax content and government relations with the National Association of Tax Professionals.

In general, filers must estimate what they owe and round up to reduce the risk of underpaying. “It feels like it’s very much a guesstimate,” Ms. Collins said.

Should you incur a penalty when you file your tax return next year, you can request an abatement. Often, the I.R.S. is lenient with first-time errors, she said, especially when there are extenuating circumstances.

It’s also important to keep track of your income in 2021, tax professionals say. Many people had lower incomes than usual during 2020 because of the pandemic, and could see them rise in 2021 if the pandemic wanes as expected and the economy expands. If your income is turning out to be higher than expected, you may need to increase the amounts of your estimated payments later in the year.

Here are some questions and answers about tax deadlines this year:

When is the deadline for making contributions to individual retirement accounts and health savings accounts?

You can make contributions to I.R.A.s and H.S.A.s for the tax year 2020 up until the extended filing deadline on May 17, the I.R.S. says.

When are the deadlines for 2021 estimated tax payments?

The first is April 15, followed by June 15, Sept. 15 and Jan. 18 of 2022.

How can I check the filing and payment deadlines in my state?

It’s wise to check your state’s revenue department website for details. You can look up the link on the Federation of Tax Administrators website.

Personal Injury Lawsuits

Way back when, my friend, Bob Naylor, was one of the creators of the "Napkin Deal". This was the negotiation that changed the way deep pockets personal injury lawsuits were litigatd.

Dan Walters Opinion: California’s Personal Injury Lawyers See Legislative Opening for More Lawsuits

To Capitol insiders, the term “tort wars” is shorthand for decades of political wrangling over the rules governing lawsuits for personal injuries — who can sue and collect damages for which actions.

The rules are a mix of legislation and appellate court interpretations, and with untold billions of dollars at stake, lawyers who specialize in personal injury suits and their political allies, such as unions and consumer advocates, clash constantly with business groups and insurers.

The former seek to expand opportunities to sue and the latter resist such expansions and occasionally try to narrow the scope of liability.

Over the decades, the conflict has generated some memorable events. In 1975, for instance, a newly inaugurated Gov. Jerry Brown signed a landmark law, dubbed MICRA, that imposed tight limits on “pain and suffering” damages in medical malpractice cases. Next year, nearly a half-century later, California voters will decide whether the $250,000 cap should remain in place or be lifted, the latest of many attempts to undo the 1975 law.

A particularly colorful episode occurred in 1987, when lobbyists for personal injury lawyers and rival interests negotiated an armistice, finalized at Frank Fat’s restaurant in Sacramento with its provisions jotted down on a napkin. The “napkin deal,” as it came to be known, reduced liability for harmful products, such as cigarettes, and gave lawyers higher fees in medical malpractice cases.

New California Real Estate Laws

By any measure, 2020 was an unprecedented year. The California commercial and residential real estate landscape changed significantly with the spread of COVID-19 and the resulting economic impacts. Throughout last year our Real Estate team provided updates on the latest legal changes through laws and emergency measures in a series of articles that can be found online on the firm’s COVID-19 resources page.

It’s important to note, however, that the sweeping changes to California real estate law set in motion in 2020 are not limited to COVID-19. We’ve compiled below legal summaries on more than a dozen new state laws involving tenancy, housing, zoning and planning, CEQA, and taxes. (All laws are effective as of January 1, 2021, unless otherwise noted.)

Arbitration agreements with Consumers and Employees

This law provides that the drafting party of a consumer or employment related arbitration agreement is in material breach of the arbitration agreement if the drafting party fails to pay, as required by existing law, specified costs and fees associated with the arbitration proceeding. This law defines the word “employee” to include any person who is, was, or who claims to have been misclassified as an independent contractor or otherwise improperly placed into a category other than employee or applicant for employment.

This new law provides that the drafting party of an employment or consumer arbitration agreement who is required, either expressly or through application of state or federal law or the rules of the arbitration administrator, to pay certain fees and costs before the arbitration can proceed, is in material breach of the agreement if the fees are not paid within 30 days after the due date, and waives its right to compel arbitration pursuant to existing law.

In the event of such a breach, an employee or consumer may generally withdraw the claim from arbitration and proceed in a court of appropriate jurisdiction, or compel arbitration in which the drafting party shall pay reasonable attorney's fees and costs related to the arbitration.

Under this law “Consumer” means an individual who seeks, uses, or acquires, by purchase or lease, any goods or services for personal, family, or household purposes.

Under this law, “employee” means any current employee, former employee, or applicant for employment. The term also includes any person who is, was, or claims to have been misclassified as an independent contractor or otherwise improperly placed into a category other than employee or applicant for employment.