Los Angeles resident and former lawyer Heather Peters won a significant victory against American Honda Motor Company in Small Claims Court. Peters was awarded $9,867.19 in damages, which is just about the maximum $10,000 allowed in Small Claims Court. The Los Angeles Times reports that at the heart of this Honda small claims lawsuit was the issue of fuel economy. Peters said Honda misled its consumers by claiming that the Honda Civic Hybrid vehicle could achieve as much as 50 miles per gallon. But, she found out after purchasing the vehicle that it did not get more than 42 miles per gallon “even on its best day.” What’s worse, that number dropped to below 30 mpg after a software update intended to prolong the car’s battery life was installed.

Taking Matters into her Own Hands

Peters sued Honda in Small Claims Court after learning that the proposed settlement covering her 2006 model vehicle would leave her with as little as $100 and a few rebate coupons – pocket change compared to the $8.5 million that trial lawyers would get paid. So Peters, who is a former lawyer, decided to take matters in her own hands, in her pursuit of justice. Although the small-claims judgment in this case is unusual and makes a statement on behalf of consumers, Peters may have a tough time collecting the money she won. Honda has vowed to appeal the Small Claim Court’s decision.

A Landmark Case

Donald Earl Childress III, who teaches civil law at Pepperdine University’s School of Law, states that Peters’ win could lead the way for litigation strategy in California and other states. It proves, Childress said, that a well-informed plaintiff who chooses not to take the class-action route and take matters into their own hands in the correct manner, could be vindicated in Small Claims Court. It might just take one person, he says, to stand up and get the win, and others will follow.

This will be an interesting issue to follow as Honda and other corporations must now decide if they want to utilize their team of lawyers to snuff out small claims cases. Under California law, corporations are not allowed to use their legal defense teams in small claims court, but they can do so during the appeals process to force such claims back into the class-action litigation process. Peters has also launched a campaign through her web site, DontSettleWithHonda.org, which talks about how she filed her lawsuit against the automaker.

How to be Successful with Small Claims

As a California personal injury lawyer, it has been my experience that even some personal injury matters are better handled by the injured party themselves rather than hiring an attorney or law firm. There are cases that can be handled quickly and efficiently in Small Claims Court. Reputable law firms will be able to give you an honest assessment of your claim, the value of your claim and the options you have before you, including the option to handle the matter yourself in Small Claims Court.

Handling things yourself may seem overwhelming at first. However, once you get started with the process, you may find it to be simpler than what you expected. By representing yourself in court, you will not have to share your award with attorneys or law firms. Whatever you get as compensation will you yours and the satisfaction you get out of it will be significantly higher. It’s really tough to put a price on holding a wrongdoer accountable. If you are looking to pursue such cases on your own, remember, there are resources available to you.

Woman Sues Honda over Hybrid’s Fuel Economy in Small Claims Court and Wins is a post from: BestAttorney.com - BISNAR | CHASE California Personal Injury Lawyers

As some of the best California motorcycle accident lawyers available, we have an obligation to give our clients an experience that is like no other as well as the highest possible amount of compensation for their injuries. Attaining these goals is no easy process and has taken over 30 years of experience to become the powerhouse motorcycle law firm that we are today, but we feel there is always room to improve. Our increase in community outreach programs has given us the opportunity to give back in a more personal way to the people who helped us become some of the best attorneys in the nation.

Raising the Bar

Very few motorcycle accident lawyers in California put forth the time and effort to help their clients succeed inside and outside of the courtroom. At our firm we believe that our success has been a result of hard work, dedication, and a commitment to helping people achieve their goals. Our entire staff has committed to working together to help people who need us. Times are tough and we are in a position to help out.

The Giving Spotlight

Our California motorcycle accident attorneys are not afraid to get their hands dirty. In March of 2011 our entire staff went down to Santa Ana, California to personally hand out food to hungry families. We are not forced to do these good deeds, we do them because our company has instilled a sense of pride and generosity amongst us and we cannot help but share the wealth. We helped distribute over 5,000 pounds of food and had a good time while doing it.

As December rolls around, our staff is starting to prepare for our yearly participation in the Adopt A Family program. Every staff member spends their own money to purchase a gift for a needy person to open on Christmas day. We have been doing this for several years and will continue to do so as we all thoroughly enjoy the entire experience.

Finding a motorcycle accident attorneys in Irvine today for a free professional evaluation of your case.

California Motorcycle Accident Lawyers Give Back To Motorcycle Victims is a post from: BestAttorney.com - BISNAR | CHASE California Personal Injury Lawyers

Effexor lawyers in California already know about the dangers associated with the use of Effexor by pregnant women, but a recent news article suggests that some women are being told to continue to use Effexor throughout their pregnancies. According to cbc news, two Canadian mothers took Effexor during their pregnancies which may have caused the death of their two infant children. An autopsy did not determine the causes of death. However, one of the autopsies listed Effexor as a contributing factor.

Effexor is an anti-depressant used to treat mood disorders. Studies show that the use of Effexor has been linked to life-threatening injuries as well as serious birth defects. Victims are being advised by attorneys to file Effexor lawsuits to be compensated for injuries sustained as well as those anticipated to arise in the future.

Nurses Know Best

According to the article, one of the deceased infants, Greyson Rawkins, was immediately sent to the intensive care unit after he was born. His mother was told by a nurse that her son was “suffering from drug withdrawal and she should watch him closely”. Greyson was seven weeks old when his mother found him dead.

Unfortunately, many product defect cases could be easily avoided. People who are well-informed of the dangers of certain medications and their propensities to harm those that take them will usually make a decision that is in their best interest. In the case of Effexor, it could be argued that the dangers associated with taking the drug are not explained in detail to those who take it. Had the mothers of these two deceased infants been better informed of the link between Effexor and birth defects, it is possible that these two children could be alive today.

Effexor Side Effects

Effexor side effects range from mild to life-threatening. The following are birth defects that have been linked to the use of Effexor.

• Anal atresia. A partial or complete closure of the anus
• Heart defects
• Clubfoot. A deformation of the foot
• Abdominal birth defects
• Autism Spectrum Disorders
• Limb defects
• Malformed genitals
• Cleft lip and cleft palate

As awful as these are, they represent only a few of the side effects associated with Effexor. If you or a loved one have taken Effexor and feel that you are experiencing harmful side effects, it is in your best interest to contact a products liability attorney immediately.

California Effexor Attorneys

Finding the best Effexor attorney in California can be difficult, but the attorneys at BISNAR | CHASE make it easy. Having developed a long history of high client satisfaction and a 97.5% success rate, our lawyers have the experience and accolades to give you peace of mind. Recently, we obtained a verdict for 24.7 million dollars for a client who was a victim of a defective product. If you are looking for great legal representation, or are just looking for more information about your case, contact one of our California Effexor lawyers today for a free professional evaluation.

Infant Deaths May Lead to Effexor lawsuits is a post from: BestAttorney.com - BISNAR | CHASE California Personal Injury Lawyers

That's right, two-time presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich is suing a congressional café because of the personal injury he suffered after biting into an olive that still contained the pit. Although frivolous sounding, Kucinich might have a legitimate gripe. Just because this incident has led to ridiculous headlines all over the country such as, "Kucinich's meal is the pits, "Olive our teeth were broken," and, "Kucinich pit against a wrap," it doesn't mean he doesn't have a case

Kucinich says he, "Sustained serious and permanent dental and oral injuries requiring multiple surgery and oral procedures," and has sustained other damages, "including significant pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment." Would a reputable Los Angeles personal injury attorney actually take his case?

Find Out The Answer

This case, along with others will be discussed on KABC Talk Radio 790 on Saturday, Feb. 5, at 4:30 pm, when Brian Chase joins Larry Elder on his show "Larry on the Law." Kucinich is seeking a whopping $150,000 in damages, plus interest and costs, from Restaurant Associates, which manages the cafeteria, and three other businesses that stock and help run the operation. Brian Chase is an expert personal injury attorney and will address this case as well as many others. Tune or call into the show Saturday to have all of your legal questions answered.

Dennis Kuncinich Sues Congressional Café is a post from: BestAttorney.com - BISNAR | CHASE California Personal Injury Lawyers

Azusa Pacific University student, Julie Farris, was severely injured in an accident that took place on her school campus in February of 2008. California personal injury lawyers at BISNAR | CHASE have represented her in a lawsuit of dangerous public property and motor vehicle negligence against the city of Azusa and APU. BISNAR | CHASE has recently announced that a judgment of $1.5 million will be awarded to Julie.

Dangerous Conditions of Public Property Lead to Severe Student Injury

The 800 block of East Foothill Boulevard is a main stretch for students traveling between the West and East campuses at Azusa Pacific University. This road is, however, highly congested with parked cars and traffic making the passage of students very dangerous. Because there are few alternative routes, hundreds of students risk catastrophic personal injury while traveling this road to class and dormitories every day.

In February of 2008, Julie Farris was riding her bicycle along this road when she was forced to travel against the flow of traffic because of the congestion. She was hit by a trolley driven by university employee, Oscar Armanda Galan, and the impact of the collision caused Julie to suffer severe, permanent brain injury. This incident brought to light the dangerous public conditions on this road that have been neglected by both the city of Azusa and the University for far too long.

Azusa and APU Negligent to Repair Dangerous Roadways

"The defendants were aware of the dangerous conditions of the roadway due to increased serious and fatal car accidents" said Brian Chase, a senior partner at BISNAR | CHASE. "They had been provided funding to make improvements, but instead, they recklessly and negligently used those funds for other projects at the expense of public safety."

The road where Julie was injured had no bike paths, bike lanes, crosswalks, or traffic signals, despite the fact that the school knew it was dangerous for cyclers and pedestrians. BISNAR | CHASE, in the lawsuit against the defendants, question further the scheduling of classes at times where the students must travel this road in its most congested conditions and the negligence of the school and city to keep the best interest of the student body in highest regard. The extent of proper safety training for the university-employed trolley operator is also a concern.

February of 2011 is the date set for the trial. It will take place in the Los Angeles County Superior Court.

$1.5 Million Judgment Goes to Injured Student in Lawsuit Against Azusa Pacific University and City of Azusa, California is a post from: BestAttorney.com - BISNAR | CHASE California Personal Injury Lawyers

Our friends at the Public Justice Foundation are fighting for consumers in California's Supreme Court. According to Arthur Bryant, Executive Director of Public Justice and the Public Justice Foundation, they are challenging an appellate court ruling that the state's constitution prevents consumers from suing companies for charging them sales tax on items that are tax-exempt. Public Justice urged the state's high court to review the appellate court's decision and the California Supreme Court has granted review.

What does this case involve? Basically, Target charged consumers for sales tax on their purchases of hot coffee "to go" from Target stores in California. There is a provision in California's Tax Code that exempts these purchases from taxation. The plaintiffs claim that Target violated California Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). Both laws are consistently recognized by courts as two of the strongest consumer protection laws in the nation.

Target argued in this case and the Court of Appeals agreed that the consumers' claims are barred by a provision of the California Constitution that bars courts from hearing lawsuits brought by taxpayers against the "State or any officer thereof." However, Public Justice and the plaintiffs rightly point out that Target is not the "State or any officer thereof" and consumers in this case are not taxpayers. The way it works in California is retailers pay sales tax to the state and consumers pay sales tax reimbursement to the retailers.

"I agree with Bryant 100 percent. What Target did here was fraud. I'm sure they know better. I wonder if they passed the payment on to the state or kept it for themselves? Why didn't Target, when first advised about this situation, simply admit they made a mistake and fix it instead of fighting its own customers in court?" asked John Bisnar, senior partner of the BISNAR | CHASE Personal Injury Attorneys.

These types of class-action lawsuits are necessary and beneficial to the public good. The state, with its budget woes and depletion of resources, simply does not have the ability or the will to police these types of illegal activities. Such lawsuits empower ordinary citizens who have been wronged, in this case by a corporate giant, to enforce the law and bring about justice. Another purpose of these lawsuits is also to encourage other firms and corporations to comply with the law or face similar lawsuits.

Target, in this case, is also making an effort to blunt the force of class action and have the court that the only recourse and each and every person who was charged this illegal tax has is to apply to the State of California for a tax refund. Target knows perfectly well that few people would actually do that, especially when the amount each person is taxed is less than 25 cents.

Class action has been the "whipping boy" of business for a long time. That's because the big boys know perfectly well that it is the only way consumers have to hold big companies accountable when they rip off thousands or millions of people for a small amount each. Corporations hate the idea that consumers can collectively hold them accountable through class action lawsuits. And without class action lawsuits, consumers have no realistic means to fight back. It is indeed a powerful tool for consumers because the economics of these cases make sense only if a large group of people joined together to bring these claims.

There is no question that consumers must be able to protect themselves from the fraudulent, strong-arm actions of business, if the state won't enforce the law. Businesses such as Target that are acting in an unfair or illegal manner avoid paying the price of that conduct if the people who are harmed by this conduct must litigate alone, be a lone voice against the conduct, rather than joined together with hundreds or thousands or millions of other voices. The costs are in the hundreds of thousands to fight a lawsuit like this one against a big company like Target. No one would do it alone

The BISNAR|CHASE personal injury law firm is not representing any of the parties mentioned in this article at the time the article was posted. Our information source is cited in the article. If you were involved in this incident or a similar incident and have questions as to your rights and options, call us or another reputable law firm. Do not act solely upon the information provided herein. Get a consultation. The best law firms will provide a free consultation. We provide a free, confidential consultation to not at fault persons named in this article. The free consultation offer extends to family members as well.

The Fight for Consumer Rights Is On is a post from: BestAttorney.com - BISNAR | CHASE California Personal Injury Lawyers