New California Child Restraint Law for 2012

Posted on January 16, 2012

As of January 1, 2012, all children under eight years of age and under 4’ 9” must be restrained in a rear seat in an appropriate child passenger restraint system that meets applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards. This modifies the previous law, which required children under six years of age who weigh less than sixty pounds to be secured in a child passenger restraint system.

The new law is the result of Senate Bill 929 introduced by State Senator Noreen Evans who represents the Second Senatorial District. Senate Bill 929 implements the recommendations of the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (“NHTSA”). The NHTSA recommends that children who have outgrown car seats with an internal harness continue to ride in booster seats until they reach age eight years or until they are 4’ 9” or taller. According to the NHTSA, booster seats help to ensure that the safety belt is positioned properly across the child and restrains, rather than injures, the child in the event of an accident.

The child advocacy group, Partners for Child Passenger Safety (“PCPS”), reports that car collisions are the leading cause of death and acquired disability in children between the ages of four and eight. It has been proven that booster seats save the lives of children by reducing their risk of injury and fatality related to automobile accidents. The PCPS cites statistics showing that booster seat use for children ages four through seven decreases the risk of injury by fifty-nine percent as compared to the use of seat belts alone.

Most parents who already have booster seats for their young children will not need to purchase new boosters. Rather, under the new law parents will simply keep their children in the same booster seat an additional two years.

This is the third time the Legislature has passed legislation requiring the use of booster seats until a child reaches age eight or 4’9” in height (AB 1290-Evans in 2006 and AB 881-Mullin in 2007). Both of those bills were vetoed by then Governor Schwarzenegger. In his veto message, Governor Schwarzenegger indicated the need to work towards compliance with existing requirements rather the enactment of new requirements. It appears the third time is the charm for this important legislation.

Heather K. Whitham

hwhitham@carnaclaw.com

Share This Post
Leave a comment

Documenting Online Personae at First Meeting with a Client

Posted on December 21, 2011

When you and your paralegal first meet with a potential client, you should consider gathering information about your clients’ online personae on your intake forms.  This may prove valuable in the investigation phase of their matters, whether it is criminal, a civil lawsuit, a family law dispute, or trust and estate matters.  It can also serve to impress upon the client the importance of designating a trusted colleague or family member to keep up with any commerce that may be taking place over the Internet.

Reflecting on the Central Coast Paralegal Association’s well-attended October MCLE presentation on Digital Afterlife (and noting that our local free paper recently did an article on the same topic), it occurred to me that this subject touches almost all our lives, if we own and operate a computer or a smart phone.

It is good practice to query a potential client about his or her online activities, including artistic works in progress.  My son worked on a screenplay for several years on a school-owned computer (in his free time).  When his term ended and he handed back the computer, his intellectual property went with it – gone forever for failure to back up the hard drive.

Assets and activities in online video games and virtual worlds can have value too.  It pays to ask.  Even if clients are not comfortable handing over all this personal information to the attorney, it’s good advice to tell them to store their passwords somewhere safe – online or in printed form.  Perhaps in a home safe or a safe deposit box so family members or a designated representative can carry on for them.  It’s just good practice.  If the information is stored only online, it will be important that someone have the necessary login information and password to access the computer.

As our clients’ lives become more complicated as a result of the ever increasing role of technology, it is important that paralegals and attorneys be aware of how to assist and advise them regarding how best to handle their digital presence.

Ellen Sheffer                                  Leslie Donahue

esheffer@carnaclaw.com              ldonahue@carnaclaw.com

Share This Post
2 Comments

California Veterinary Premises Licensees –Are you ready to be “wholly responsible”?

Posted on December 14, 2011

The California Veterinary Medical Board (“Board”) is in the process of adopting a new regulation to establish “minimum standards” for a managing licensee of a veterinary hospital premise. Under the current regulations, it is the responsibility of the managing veterinarian to ensure that the premises comply with minimum standards of veterinary practice.  However, the Board does not articulate what that obligation entails.  If the Board’s new regulation makes it through the adoption process, the managing licensee will have more clearly defined and additional obligations.

Proposed Board Regulation 2030.5 provides:

(a)          A Licensee Manager is the California licensed veterinarian named as the Managing Licensee on a facility’s premise permit.

(b)          The Licensee Manager is responsible for ensuring that the premise for which he/she is manager complies with specified requirements of the Veterinary Practice Act and is responsible for ensuring that the physical and operational components of a premise meet the minimum standards of practice as set forth in the Board’s regulations.

(c)          The Licensee Manager is responsible for ensuring that no unlicensed activity is occurring within the premise or in any location where any function of veterinary medicine, veterinary surgery or veterinary dentistry is being conducted off the premises under the auspices of this premise license.

(d)          The Licensee Manager shall maintain whatever physical presence is reasonable within the facility to ensure that the requirements in (a) – (c) are met.

(e)          Each licensed veterinarian shall be responsible for their individual violations of the practice act or any regulation adopted thereunder.

In case there is any doubt regarding the Board’s mission in adopting this new regulation, the regulation adoption process requires a licensing Board to state its “reasons” for the regulation, which the Board has articulated as follows:

The proposed regulation establishes the minimum standards for a California licensed veterinarian who is the managing licensee of a veterinary hospital premise. It establishes that the managing licensee is wholly responsible for insuring the minimum standards are followed regardless of the number of hospital premises managed by the managing licensee and it requires the manager to maintain whatever physical presence is necessary to ensure such requirements are met. (Emphasis added).

Many veterinary premises licensees will have to examine and change the way they run their hospitals and clinics. Are you ready to be “wholly responsible”?  If you need advice regarding the current Board regulation or the proposed Board regulations, attorneys at Carmel & Naccasha, LLP are ready to provide assistance.

Steven L. Simas

ssimas@carnaclaw.com

Share This Post
Leave a comment

Managing Multiple Beneficiaries on Trust Deeds

Posted on December 9, 2011

Nearly all real estate loans in California are secured by a trust deed. A trust deed is a device wherein a borrower transfers legal title to property to a trustee which holds it as security for a debt between a borrower and a lender. Most real estate loans have only one lender (at any given time) such as a bank, however, some real estate financing arrangements have multiple lenders (or beneficiaries) for a single trust deed. Often, these beneficiaries will be several private individuals who come together and lend on a single loan. When things are going well and everyone is getting paid, ownership and management of the trust deed is a simple from the beneficiaries’ end…they sit back and get paid in accordance with the terms of the loan. However, if the loan is in default, the different beneficiaries may not agree on how best to move forward. Continue reading →

Share This Post
Leave a comment

Red Lights and Cell Phones

Posted on December 2, 2011

Many of us have talked on our cell phone while driving even though we know it is a violation of the Vehicle Code. Vehicle Code section 23123 pertains to driving while using a cell phone without the use of a hands free device. Many of us have made or taken that occasional call while driving. Recently, I accepted such a call and quickly pulled over to the side of the road. As I spoke on the phone with my car idling I wondered if my actions constituted using a cell phone while “driving.” A recent case doesn’t answer that specific question; however, it does analyze similar issues. Continue reading →

Share This Post
Leave a comment

An Unwaivable Right under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Revisited

Posted on November 14, 2011

I previously summarized a decision out of the California Court of Appeals, Fourth Appellate District, Fisher v. DCH Temecula Imports LLC, in which the court held that a consumer’s right to bring a class action under the California Legal Remedies Act (the “CLRA”) constitutes an unwaivable statutory right.  In this blog, I will discuss a parallel case from the California Court of Appeals, Second Appellate District, Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., LLC, that has been simultaneously working its way through the courts.  A review of my prior September 21, 2010 entry would be helpful to understanding this update: Unwaivable Right. Continue reading →

Share This Post
Leave a comment

The City of San Luis Obispo’s Measures A and B- A Look at How the City’s Charter May be Amended

Posted on October 20, 2011

The City of San Luis Obispo is governed by a Charter adopted by the local voters. The provisions of the city’s Charter may be amended from time to time or repealed by subsequent votes of the voters. An amendment to the Charter may be proposed either by the City Council or by an initiative submitted to the City Council by the voters. Continue reading →

Share This Post
Leave a comment

Sabbatical Programs Offered to Employees May Count as Vested Vacation upon Separation

Posted on October 14, 2011

Employers who choose to include sabbaticals as part of their employee benefits must understand the implications of such a benefit upon an employee’s separation with the employer. Most employers know vested vacation must be paid to the employee upon separation, however, they do not realize sabbaticals may also qualify as vested vacation that must be paid to the employee upon separation. Continue reading →

Share This Post
1 Comment

Impact of State Budget on Access to Justice; Proposed Changes to Local Rules

Posted on October 5, 2011

The continuing state budget crisis is being experienced locally to a greater extent.  Beginning October 7, some employees will be furloughed every Friday.  Although courthouses will be open on Fridays, services will be greatly reduced.  A few courtrooms will be open to tend to mandated hearings and criminal matters, domestic violence, elder abuse and civil harassment restraining orders involving stalking and/or threats of domestic violence. Continue reading →

Share This Post
Leave a comment

Changes to Court Services

Posted on October 4, 2011

The San Luis Obispo Superior Court announced changes to the services provided by the Court due to budget cuts and the need for additional furloughs. To see the full announcement visit the Court’s website at www.slocourts.net/announcements.

Share This Post
Leave a comment