CGLaw Pod

In this episode of Ganci Law Update, attorney Eric Ganci delves into three crucial legal cases:

• Stack v. City of Lemoore: Despite the plaintiff's prior safe use of the sidewalk, the court rejected the argument that individual familiarity with the area should affect the assessment of the dangerous condition. The court's decision delves into the legal complexities of premises liability, emphasizing the general foreseeabi...

In this Ganci Law Update episode, attorney Eric Ganci examines three pivotal legal cases:

• Glynn v. Orange Circle Lounge, Inc. (2023): explore the complex question of whether bars owe a duty of safety to their patrons. While the answer to this question is often "it depends," this case provides insights into the bar's responsibility in ensuring the safety of its customers.
• Perez v. Galt Joint Union Elementary School ...

In this episode of the Ganci Law Update, attorney Eric Ganci delves into a range of intriguing legal cases, offering valuable insights and analysis:

1. Camacho v. JLG Industries Inc. (2023): Traverse the maze of the design defect case, as what appeared as a minor design flaw spiraled into intricate legal quandaries and an unforeseen courtroom denouement.
2. Inzunza v. Naranjo (2023): Spotlighting the Requests for Admissions' indis...

In this episode of the Ganci Law Update, CaseyGerry trial attorney Eric Ganci discusses Brain injury cases touching on the recent case - Randy’s Trucking, Inc. v. The Superior Court of Kern County (Buttram) 2023 WL 3530705.

In a Traumatic Brain Injury case, both sides will usually hire experts examine or prove that claim.

However, in preliminary testing, neuropsychologists may have the option of not disclosing the results of the prel...

Sometimes courts disagree on how to read and interpret the law. CaseyGerry attorney, Eric Ganci explores the decision in Tansavatdi v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes (2023) 14 Cal.5th 639, where the Supreme court steps in to settle a disagreement between two lower courts on whether a design immunity claim against a public government agency can preclude a decision for seeking a claim when a government has failed to warn of a dangerous ...

In this episode of the Ganci Law Update, CaseyGerry attorney Eric Ganci discusses rights and limitations in filing a lawsuit against another party. Ganci explores several recent judgments to address this.

In Braugh v. Dow, 2023 WL 4312617, he discusses California law as it pertains to the following question:

• Can you personally serve the summons and complaint if you are a party to the lawsuit?

Touching on another recent case, ...

Villanueva v. California (2021) 986 F.3d 1158 

In this week's podcast, CaseyGerry attorney Eric Ganci explores the growing number of police shootings and use of deadly force, raising questions about if police are protected under the law, focusing on Qualified Immunity and how, and if it protects law enforcement in cases of deadly shootings. 

Villanueva was involved in a car chase and was stopped by police officers. Th...

Luebke v. Automobile Club of Southern California (2020) 59 Cal.App.5th 694

This podcast discusses the case, Luebke v. Automobile Club of Southern California (2020) to address the question: What happens when you file your trial papers, show up for your day in court and get hit with a curve ball? The judge presents a new item that you were not aware of, an issue that no party raised and shouldn't need to be decided on ...

Mostafavi Law Group, APC v. Larry Rabineau, APC (2021) 61 Cal.App.5th 614 

CSAA Insurance Exchange v. Hodroj (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 272 

This case decision is a technical one. Specifically on 998 those offers must be drafted to be accepted. 

First, what is a 998 Offer? A CCP998 offer is one made before a case goes to trial to settle at a certain amount. If a 998 is offered but not accepted, it sets the bar for what a verdict must ...

If you injure yourself while jogging on someone's property, is the property owner liable for negligence?

In this installment, CaseyGerry attorney Eric Ganci explores this question referencing a recent judgement in  Rucker v. WINCAL, LLC (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 883. 

According to the California civil code 846 (A) - "An owner owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry others for entry or use for any recr...

Covert v. FCA USA, LLC (2022) 73 Cal.App.5th 821 

Segal v. ASICS (2022) 12 Cal.5th 651  

Timing is crucial in serving a demand to settle against another party in a civil lawsuit. Firstly, is there an advantage for plaintiff to offer defendant a settlement offer? The answer is - yes...if the timing is right.

In this podcast, CaseyGerry attorney Eric Ganci discusses the importance of timing in filing a demand to settle, touching on the ...

In this installment of the Ganci Law Update, CaseyGerry attorney Eric Ganci discusses depositions and how a 2022 decision influences how depositions can be used if a party is unavailable for trial. 

Using the recent 2022 decision in Berroteran II v. Superior Court, Ganci examines the question - can a prior deposition be used as evidence if a party is unavailable for trial.

Prior deposition transcripts, otherwise heresay, can be admis...

In this episode, CaseyGerry attorney Eric Ganci discusses how the law determines if punitive damages are excessive.

If a person has acted negligently or improperly and has harmed someone else as a result, California law sometimes allows the plaintiff to seek punitive damages in addition to compensation. Delving into the recent 2022 case, Doe v. Lee, Ganci explores when a verdict for punitive damages is excessive in the eyes of the l...