Author - Ashley H. Verdon

1
California Court Of Appeal Limits The Application Of Howell In Cases Involving Medical Finance Companies – Moore v. Mercer (2016) 4 Cal.App.5th 424
2
California’s Court Of Appeal Confirms That Comparative Fault Applies To Professional Malpractice Claims And That Pre-Judgment Interest Is Not Recoverable Where Issues Exist On Fault And Apportionment
3
Proof or It Did Not Happen: California Court of Appeal Rules on Electronic Signature Authentication
4
Top Dollar for the White Collar: Obama Administration Increases Salary Thresholds for White Collar Overtime Exemptions

California Court Of Appeal Limits The Application Of Howell In Cases Involving Medical Finance Companies – Moore v. Mercer (2016) 4 Cal.App.5th 424

By: Ashley H. Verdon and Katherine J. Flores
May 25, 2017

In a plaintiff friendly decision, the Third District California Court of Appeal held that an uninsured plaintiff may present evidence of the full billed amount for medical treatment where a healthcare provider has sold its accounts receivable and medical liens to a medical finance company.

In Moore v. Mercer, an uninsured plaintiff executed medical lien agreements with her doctors in order to obtain medical treatment following an automobile collision.  At trial, plaintiff filed a motion in limine to exclude evidence of the medical finance company’s involvement on the grounds that it was irrelevant and prejudicial.  The trial court granted the motion in limine under Evidence Code §352.  Defendant appealed.

Read More

California’s Court Of Appeal Confirms That Comparative Fault Applies To Professional Malpractice Claims And That Pre-Judgment Interest Is Not Recoverable Where Issues Exist On Fault And Apportionment

By: Ashley H. Verdon
May 25, 2017

In Yale v. Bowne (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 649, Yale sued her former attorney for negligence in the preparation of an estate plan which, contrary to Yale’s wishes, transmuted all of her separate property to community property, and ultimately forced her to enter into an unfavorable settlement with her ex-husband so that Yale could avoid potentially losing half of everything in her divorce.  In the negligence case, the jury found that Yale’s attorney was professionally negligent and that Yale was comparatively negligent, allocating 90% fault to her attorney and 10% fault to Yale.

Read More

Proof or It Did Not Happen: California Court of Appeal Rules on Electronic Signature Authentication

By: Ashley Verdon and Neil Eddington
September 30, 2016

If you belong to one of the ever-increasing number of businesses using electronic signatures, then it might be time to review your authentication security procedures in place.   As electronic signatures become the norm in conducting business, California courts are busy with cases challenging their enforceability.  Recently, in Espejo v. Southern California Permanente Medical Group (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 1047, the Second District Court of Appeal ruled that an employer sufficiently authenticated an employee’s electronic signature to an arbitration agreement.  In doing so, the court offered some clarity as to what evidence is necessary to enforce an electronic signature under the Uniform Electronic Transmissions Act (“UETA”).  (Cal. Civ. Code §1633.)

Read More

Top Dollar for the White Collar: Obama Administration Increases Salary Thresholds for White Collar Overtime Exemptions

By: Ashley Verdon and Neil Eddington
September 30, 2016

With a regulation sure to invite both praise and condemnation, the Obama Administration announced new salary thresholds for the Fair Labor Standard Act’s (“FLSA”) overtime exemptions. The new thresholds will bring overtime eligibility to millions of previously-exempted white collar workers. Under the new guidelines, executive, administrative, and professional employees earning $47,476 per year or less will be entitled to overtime pay, doubling the previous federal threshold of $23,660.

Read More

© Copyright 2000-2016 Chapman, Glucksman, Dean & Roeb apc - All Rights Reserved