VCTLA Trial Lawyer of the Year - Allen R. Ball, Esq.

Gregory Johnson, Esq. (2009 Trial Lawyer of the Year), Allen R. Ball, Esq. (2010 Trial Lawyer of the Year), and Hon. Harry Walsh of Ventura County Superior Court

On May 24, 2011, Partner, Allen R. Ball, Esq. was honored by the Ventura County Trial Lawyers Association as the 2010 Trial Lawyer of the Year, "based on contributions to the legal community, and to the betterment of the civil justice system while demonstrating high ethical standards, civility, courage and advocacy." (VCBA Citations, June 2011)

Mr. Ball was nominated by Gregory Johnson, Esq. (2009 VCTLA Trial Lawyer of the Year) for the Ventura County case Padilla v Bailard.  

Plaintiff made an offer pursuant to Civil Code Section 998 for $150,000.00  and Defendants refused, making their own offer pursuant to Civil Code Section 998 for $50,000.00.  

The Jury awarded Plaintiff more than $860,000.00.

Dennis Jones, Esq. Presents Allen R. Ball, Esq. with the Award for 2010 Trial Lawyer of the Year

Allen R. Ball, 2010 Ventura County Trial Lawyer of the Year

Allen R. Ball with his wife, Edith Ball

Allen R. Ball with Family: Joshua Ball, Claudia Calderon, Edith Ball, and Annette Heck

Please visit www.vcba.org for the full Citations article.

Click here to read the VC Star article: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/jun/03/attorneys-name-trial-lawyer-of-the-year/

Joseph Rocco Jones, Esq. Swearing in Ceremony

On May 9, 2011, Joseph Rocco Jones, graduate of Ventura College of Law, was sworn in by Hon. Vincent O'Neill, Jr. in Courtroom 22 of the Ventura County Superior Courthouse.

Congratulations to Mr. Jones, Esq. and a special Thank You to Judge O'Neill for being so generous with your time!

Mr. Jones is now an associate attorney at the Law Office of Ball & Yorke, as well as an instructor at the Ventura College of Law and the UCSB Extension Program.  

Joseph Rocco Jones, Esq. and Hon. Vincent O'Neill, Jr.

Mexican American Bar Association Recognizes Claudia Calderon

Claudia Calderon is one of  the paralegals here at The Law Office Of Ball And Yorke.

 Claudia was recognized for her hard work by M.A.B.A. (Mexican American Bar Association) this last Friday at their annual scholarship dinner. Claudia is working very hard to finish law school at the local Ventura College Of Law while continuing to work for our office full time. We are proud to have employees that give back to the community and aspire to great things.

Please join us in congratulating her!

The Importance Of Keeping Solid Documentation

It is important to make a strategy for keeping your case relevant documentation. Pictures, recordings, written statements, bills, police reports, emails and much more are all documentation that can be used and will very likely be asked for in many legal cases.

Say you were in a car accident, it may take many months before anything goes to court. Once it does with all that has happened from the accident until the court appearance it is often very difficult to keep track of it all without having a plan.

Here are some tips that will help you make sure you have the right documentation when you need it.

When In Doubt Keep It- If you are unsure of whether not to keep an item or not keep it. Especially if you haven't yet talked to a lawyer about your case strategy. It may be something useful that can be used. You want a professional to make those decisions.

Always Make Multiple Copies- Remember that your lawyer is going to need copies, you will need at least 2 copies (in case one gets lost) and your insurance company will need copies and that's just for the people on your side.

Make A Digital Copy- Scanning your documents onto the computer make it easy to organize them and keep them together. It also makes it convenient for creating copies, say at a law office by using a flash disk. Email is another great way to do this and is often quite secure. The great thing about emails is that they have time stamps demonstrating a time-line becomes very easy if you use emails.

Use Your Email For Responses- This is a great way to demonstrate what communication was taking place over time. If you were called and talked to by someone who is involved with the case you may want to make a habit of emailing them back what you felt was talked about it and asking for a confirming response, even if you were on the same page on the phone. Its funny, people have more of a habit of doing what they say when they write it down.

Have Them Write Down Your Goals- When working with attorneys, union reps, and insurance agents ask them to right down their goals and strategy for your situation so you can use that as a benchmark for performance later as well as make sure everyone is on the same page.

www.ballandyorke.com

Facebook As Court Evidence?

YES IT IS!
Lets face it with the advent of the internet the world is a much smaller place. People can be found in a blink online if you know what to look for. Facebook has made this info even more accessible. As a user of facebook I do believe it is important to use and create a community online because of the many benefits and opportunities it lends, but, you must also be aware of some of the possible problems associated with it.

With courtroom evidence it can be a particularly troubling web application. Below I have attached a link an article from USA Today a couple years back that illustrates the effect facebook can have on a court's decision.

In the article a young man in college caused an accident while drunk driving that caused a 20 yr old girl to be severely injured and hospitalized for over a week. 2 weeks after he was charged with drunk driving this young man attended a Halloween party dressed as  prisoner with an orange jump suit labeled jail bird. Not surprisingly these pictures were found and submitted to court to demonstrate that the defendant was not remorseful for his actions. Ultimately, this information was used as character evidence by the judge and the defendant was given longer sentencing.

    The important thing to remember is that facebook is for the world to see and once its posted that information is no longer yours its the world's and it can be used to bite you on the butt if you aren't careful. Please read this startling article on facebook in use at courts for character reference.

here is the link to the article:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/internetlife/2008-07-19-facebook-trials_N.htm


www.ballandyorke.com

Defendants Wrongful Use Of Process

It is a tort to use the civil or criminal form of process to primarily seek a result other than that for which the form of process was intended. The conduct that encompasses the abuse of process is a defendant's wrongful use of the process for an ulterior purpose and some willful act in the use of the process to accomplish that ulterior purpose.

For example, if a defendant obtains a judgment against a plaintiff for a debt, and the plaintiff subsequently pays the debt, the defendant is liable for abuse of process if he takes out an execution on the judgment.

Abuse of process does not involve the wrongful bringing of a suit, which is the tort of malicious prosecution. Rather, it involves the improper use of the process after the suit has properly begun. Abuse of process also does not cover situations in which a defendant has an incidental motive of spite or an ulterior purpose to bringing the action if the action is brought primarily for the purpose for which the form of process was intended. Thus, a person who prosecutes an accused based on the accused's unlawful act is not abusing the process merely because he incidentally does not like the accused.

The usual case of abuse of process occurs with relation to extortion, whereby a person uses the process to put pressure upon another to compel him to pay a debt not related to the action.

The defendant will be liable to the plaintiff for any harm caused by the abuse of process.

Check us out at www.ballandyorke.com

Negligence Per Se

Ordinarily, a jury determines whether a defendant was negligent in a personal injury action. However, in some cases, a court may determine that a defendant was "negligent per se." If a court determines that a defendant is guilty of negligence per se, then the defendant's negligence is conclusively established and the plaintiff is not required to offer further evidence of the defendant's negligence. Most negligence per se cases involve an unexcused violation of a law. For example, a plaintiff is involved in an automobile accident with a defendant. The plaintiff files a personal injury action against the defendant. It is undisputed that the defendant was driving at 85 miles per hour at the time of the accident. According to state law, a person may not drive in excess of 65 miles per hour. A judge may determine that the defendant is guilty of negligence per se because he was violating the speed limit law at the time of the accident. If so, the defendant's negligence will be conclusively established.

In order for the doctrine of negligence per se to apply:

(1) the law must have been designed to prevent the kind of harm for which the plaintiff seeks to recover; and

(2) the plaintiff must be within the class of persons for whose protection the law was adopted.

In the above example, the speed limit law was designed to prevent automobile accidents, and the plaintiff is seeking to recover for injuries sustained in an automobile accident. Therefore, the law at issue was designed to prevent the kind of harm for which the plaintiff seeks to recover.

If the law at issue has nothing to do with the plaintiff's injuries, then the doctrine of negligence per se will not apply. For example, the defendant was not violating the speed limit law at the time of the accident, but his car violated an environmental emission law. The defendant's violation of that law had nothing to do with the accident, so the doctrine of negligence per se will not apply.

In the first example above, in which the defendant was violating the speed limit law at the time of the accident, the speed limit law was adopted to protect drivers. The plaintiff was a driver at the time of the accident, so he is within the class of persons for whose protection the speed limit law was adopted.

If the defendant was violating the environmental emission law at the time of the accident, and the law was designed to protect the natural habitat of endangered condors, then the plaintiff is not within the class of persons for whose protection the law was adopted, and the doctrine of negligence per se will not apply.

A court may refuse to find a defendant negligent per se if the defendant had a valid excuse for violating the law. For example, if the defendant's brakes failed just before the accident and he was unable to slow down his car, then the court may refuse to find him negligent per se based upon his violation of the speed limit law.

www.ballandyorke.com