As lawyers for the victims of the San Bruno fire, we learned that the “gas side of the house” at PG&E saves money by collecting money from rate payers to perform maintenance and then deferring the work. The extra money on the books helps improve PG&E’s bottom line, and results in bigger bonuses for PG&E’s management.

As it turns out, the electric side of the house has a history of doing the same thing.  Most notably, inButte Fire: PG&E Tree Trimming 1998 the California Public Utilities Commission found that PG&E took $77.6 million that was supposed to be spent trimming trees near power lines, and used it to boost profits, just as PG&E would later do in San Bruno.

The CPUC report followed a Nevada County jury’s verdict that found PG&E criminally liable for the Trauner fire near Grass Valley. That fire was started when a tree limb that PG&E was supposed to keep trimmed brushed up against a 21.000-volt power line. 

The Nevada County Deputy District Attorney on this case was hopeful that the verdict would bring about change.

Hopefully, this sends a message to upper-level PG&E management that they must do whatever is necessary to comply with the law and protect public safety.

Given what happened in San Bruno, and what just happened in Butte, the Nevada County verdict apparently wasn’t enough of a message.  

By now it’s no secret that the Butte Fire was likely sparked by a tree coming into contact with a PG&E overhead line. Jaxon Van Der Beken of the San Francisco Chronicle (who, by the way, won awards for his investigative reporting of the San Bruno PG&E fire), broke that news a week ago.

But PG&E makes a point of saying that the tree was a Butte Fire PG&E Tree Trimming live tree. PG&E really wants us to know that.

Does it matter? Not really. Certainly, PG&E’s lawyers will point out that there are many regulations requiring PG&E to clear away from it’s overhead electrical lines trees that are dead or rotten.  For example, the California Public Utility Commission rules say

When [PG&E] has actual knowledge . . . that dead, rotten or diseased trees or dead, rotten or diseased portions of otherwise healthy trees overhang or lean toward and may fall into a span of supply or communication lines, said trees or portions thereof should be removed.

But PG&E’s responsibilities don’t end there. The law requires PG&E to prune as necessary to keep it’s electrical lines clear of all trees, dead or alive.

Dead trees, old decadent or rotten trees, trees weakened by decay or disease and trees or portions thereof that are leaning toward the line which may contact the line from the side or may fall on the line shall be felled, cut, or trimmed so as to remove such hazard.

If, as PG&E says, it inspected many times since 2014 the live tree that sparked the fire, it presumably should have noticed that the tree could contact the electrical line, just as might a dead or rotten tree, and "felled, cut, or trimmed" the tree so as to remove the hazard.  

PG&E’s lawyers might argue the point, but on its own website, PG&E seems to acknowledge that its responsibility extends to all trees that might come in contact with one of its lines, whether that tree is dead or alive. 

Utilities are required to maintain clearance between vegetation and high voltage power lines at all times in all areas for public safety and electric system reliability.

It’s just common sense.

Many women who suffered arterial events such as strokes or heart attacks have been waiting since 2009 for Bayer to come to the negotiating table. The women claim that Bayer’s oral contraceptives Yaz, Yasmin and Beyaz caused their injuries. Bayer has now agreed to set aside $56.9 million to compensate these women. It’s up to each individual woman to decide whether to participate in the program that Bayer is offering.

Since 2011 Bayer has paid $2 billion to settle claims of women who suffered venous events such as pulmonary embolisms and deep vein thrombosis. But under the deal now on the table, the approximately 1200 injured women with arterial – related injuries would share $46.9 million, with another $10 million available for those women and families who can demonstrate that their injuries were particularly severe or that a family member died from the arterial event. The settlement program amounts to an average of $50,000 per woman.

The Court has ordered the lawyers for all potential claimants to submit certain forms on behalf of their clients before Friday August 7th at 11:59 EST. The women whose lawyers submit the forms will then have until September 12th to decide if they want to Opt-In to the program.

Not only does a traumatic brain injury (TBI)  forever change the life of the victim, it also causes serious damage to the health and lives of the victim’s family. The TBI victim is not the same person which causes profound stress to the care giving family. The stress is constant and there is usually no hope for improvement.

The TBI victim has extensive cognitive, emotional and behavioral problems. These problems result in a grim life for the family caregiver. Studies show:

  • A divorce rate of 84% for TBI couples
  • All or most of the family savings gets consumed
  • Compromised immune system for up to three years after caregiving ends
  • An increased risk of developing a chronic illness.
  • Major depression diagnoses for nearly 50% of caregivers.
  • Premature aging, taking as much as 10 years off a caregivers’ life.

When a wrongdoer has caused a TBI, the caregiver victim should also be compensated. While these are the results of scientific studies, how does a caregiver demonstrate her injury to a jury? Some steps to document the impact:

  • Start a diary of events. While the family members may feel disloyal about recording negative behaviors, the diary is necessary to help others understand the depth and breadth of the loss.
  • Seek respite services to relieve the stress of caregiving.
  • Seek emotional support through participating in support groups or counselling with a psychotherapist.

Despite risks of blood clots, stroke and death, in October 2015 California will be the first state to allow women to purchase birth control pills without a prescription. The pharmacist need only  complete a one hour training, conduct a health screening of the woman and take her blood pressure.  And, there is no age restriction.

Oregon has a similar law that will take effect in January 2016.  While Oregonians are still working on the regulations, they will likely require more training for the pharmacists and will only sell to minors who have a prior prescription from a doctor.   

Although women’s rights advocates applaud the improved access to oral contraceptives, some are concerned about the serious health risks posed by the drugs and fear the lack of  health care provider screening will increase unnecessary risks. 

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a progressive degenerative disease which afflicts the brain of people who have suffered repeated concussions and traumatic brain injuries, such as athletes who take part in contact sports, members of the military and others.

The brain of an individual who suffers from CTE gradually deteriorates and will over time end up losing mass. Certain areas of the brain will atrophy, and other areas are prone to becoming enlarged. Another aspect of CTE is that some areas of the brain experience an accumulation of tau protein, a substance which serves to stabilize the structure of brain cells (neurons). With CTE, neurons become defective and subsequently may cause major interference with the brain’s ability to send messages.

Some of the most common symptoms include loss of memory, difficulty controlling impulsive or erratic behavior, impaired judgment, and behavioral disturbances including aggression and depression, difficulty with balance, and a gradual onset of dementia. An individual with CTE may mistakenly relate the symptoms to the normal process of aging, or might be misdiagnosed to the fact that many of the symptoms are similar to other conditions such as Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease.

Takeda, the manufacturer of Actos, has agreed to pay $nearly $2.4 billion to settle bladder cancer claims brought by users: 

  1. who  took Actos at some time prior to December 1, 2011,
  2. who were diagnosed with bladder cancer on or before April 28, 2015, and
  3. who retained counsel before May 1, 2015. Under the terms of the settlement, approximately $2.4 billion will be distributed to approximately 10,600 Actos qualifying users, for average award of $225,000. 

The exact amount of any individual settlement award will be determined through an agreed-upon points matrix by which a number of points will be assigned to each individual claimant based on the level of injury.  The point total will then be adjusted up or down based on various factors, such as length of Actos use, smoking history, and prior history of bladder cancer. 

The five levels of injury include 1) a single occurrence of low grade bladder cancer; 2) recurrence of bladder cancer or occurrence of high grade or T1 bladder cancer; 3) occurrence of T2 bladder cancer or treatment for any bladder cancer by radiation or oral or intravenous chemotherapy; 4) occurrence of T3 bladder cancer or partial or radical cystectomy or nephrectomy to treat bladder cancer; and 5) occurrence of T4 bladder cancer or death from bladder cancer. 

If you meet the criteria above, you should be receiving more information from your attorney.  Please note that Individuals who wish to participate in the settlement must opt-in to the resolution program by July 13, 2015, and then submit a claim package (by a date to be determined) including documentation substantiating the injury and factors accounted for in the points matrix.  A Claims Administrator will then determine points each participant, and calculate the dollar value of each point to determine individual settlement awards. 

Recently a California jury awarded 249 exotic dancers $6.5 million for unpaid wages.  The jury found that their employer, Paradise Showgirls, violated the Labor Code that prohibits a Club from taking a portion of the dancers’ tips or requiring a divestment of payments for services. The exotic dancers are employees, not independent contractors, and thus need not contribute any portion of what they earn to defray the Club’s overhead. 

The law prohibits employers from making decisions regarding employees based upon protected classes. But what is a protected class?

Protected classes are certain categories of specific, personal characteristics. For example, gender is a protected class. That means, an employer may not make decisions regarding employees based upon the employee’s gender. An employer cannot fire, demote, or take another adverse job action against an employee because the employee is a woman or because the employee is a man. In fact, the employee’s gender may not be the reason the employer takes any adverse action at all.

The  laws recognizes the following protected classes:

  • race,
  • gender (or sex),
  • national origin,
  • religion,
  • disability,
  • age (over 40 only),
  • pregnancy,
  • citizenship,
  • familial status, and
  • veteran status.

Additionally, California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) law expands the list of protected classes to include medical condition, sexual orientation, and gender identity. See, Gov. Code, §§ 12940, 12945, and 12945.2.

Some cities in California expand the list even further. For example, Santa Cruz and San Francisco both make it illegal to discriminate in the workplace against someone based on their weight. Santa Cruz also includes “physical characteristic” in its protected classes.

Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. the manufacture of Actos diabetes medicine has offered to pay more than $2.2 billion to resolve patients’ claims that the drug caused their cancer, according to Bloomberg News. More than 8,000 patients fighting bladder cancer have filed lawsuits in state and federal court. The settlement offer would pay each patient or his heirs approximately $275,000.  

Many people doubt that the $2.2 billion is sufficient to compensate all of the patients. It is speculated that Takeda may choose to settle cases with some lawyers and continue negotiations with others. Plaintiff lawyers who oversee the litigation in federal court for plaintiffs have stated that at this time, “There is no deal.”