News Archives - Page 3 of 9 - Solomon Saltsman & Jamieson

Largest Verdict For Fraud Ever Rendered For Deception Related To E-Z-Go Golf Cars. Fraud Judgment For 1.67 Million Dollars Entered Against Textron Inc.

March 3, 2014/in Business Law, News /by partners

Stephen Jamieson, a partner in the law firm Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson based in Los Angeles, California, in association with Tom Ward of the Lancaster based law firm Michelizzi, Schwabacher, Ward & Collins, obtained a Judgment for Fraud against E-Z-Go division of Textron, Inc. also known as TEXTRON INC this month. TEXTRON INC., a multinational defense contractor that is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol TXT is ranked 190th on the Forbes 500. Ryan Kroll, an associate at Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson assisted Mr. Jamieson.

After a six week trial, a twelve person jury decided a verdict in favor of Ridgetop Ranch Properties, Inc. dba Lake Elizabeth Golf Course (LEGC) on claims of Breach of Express Warranty, Breach of the Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose, Fraud by Intentional Misrepresentation and Fraud by Concealment.

“The jury was clearly convinced by the evidence produced at trial that TEXTRON (E-Z-GO Golf Cart Division) committed Fraud,” explains Stephen Jamieson. “E-Z-GO tried to hide behind limitations in its printed warranty but was not allowed to do so.”

According to the lawsuit: the 80 E-Z-GO TXT golf cars broke down, failed, or were inoperable on a weekly basis, rendering numerous golf cars unfit for use; that while E-Z-GO was stating to LEGC that the golf cars were not defective for use at the Course, E-Z-GO was nevertheless at the same time seeking reimbursement and credit from the speed controller manufacturer, Curtis Instruments Inc., claiming the speed controllers used on the TXT golf cars were defective and/or unfit for use; and, that E-Z-GO concealed these and other facts from LEGC and went on to replace the failed speed controllers with similarly defective controllers.

Due to the continual breakdowns of the E-Z-GO golf cars, LEGC gained a reputation at that time as a course that was unreliable and dangerous, thereby suffering a tremendous decrease in the number of golf rounds played which caused a decrease in profitability and a diminution of value of the Course. The jury determined damages caused by E-Z-GO Division of Textron Inc., also known as TEXTRON, INC., to be $1,670,932.00, plus Costs, and 10% Post Judgment Interest.

The Complaint and Judgment are at: www.ssjlaw.com

Fraud Found by Jury Against a Real Estate Broker

March 3, 2014/in News /by partners

Our client, a 52 year-old single woman, purchased a home in a beautiful rural area on a lake north of Los Angeles. The home was in a gated community of many houses that share a lake. When the client purchased the home, the Real Estate Broker and Sales Agent assured the client that the home was in good condition and did not need any major maintenance or repairs.

Shortly after close of escrow the client moved in and started to improve the property by installing a new deck from which to view sunsets over the lake with her toddler granddaughter.

Within a few weeks the toilet started to back up, the sink and shower would not drain and the client called plumbers to fix the problem. At that point, she discovered that this drainage problem had been an issue at the house for many years and no one had disclosed it.

Specifically, the drainage problem was the house did not have a modern sewage system at all. It did not have a sewer. It did not have a septic tank. There was only a dirt pit into which the raw sewage would dump from the drains in the house. When that pit was full, sewage overflowed into the house.

The client then stopped using the toilet and showers while she attempted to find a way to fix it. She did not have any money left to fix it after purchasing the house. For almost a year she communicated with the Real Estate Sales Agent, who assured her that this problem would be fixed. Then, the Real Estate Sales Agent abruptly stopped taking her calls.

During this entire time the client had to go to great lengths to do routine things anyone should be able to do in their home; she either used her neighbor’s bathroom or drove 2.5 miles to the nearest gas station to use their facilities. She showered at the gym each morning.

When her 3 year-old granddaughter visited, she was forced to either use the lawn outside or depend on the neighbor’s good graces for bathroom privileges.

Finally after about a year, the client was able to connect the property up to the municipal sewage system.

Stephen Allen Jamieson and R. Bruce Evans represented the client when she took her case before the Los Angeles Superior Court. At trial, the Real Estate Broker and Sales Agent argued that she did not know about the sewage pit and potential overflow problems. However, the jury disbelieved the Agent.

They found against the Real Estate Broker company and the Sales Agent for professional negligence and in favor of Jamieson’s and Evan’s client for a substantial amount of money. This sum represented the difference in the value of land as sold versus the value of the land as the Agent had represented, along with compensation for the emotional distress our client suffered. The case was thereafter settled for a confidential dollar amount.

FROM INDIAN COUNTRY TODAY Saltsman and Solomon: Letting the genie out of the bottle?

March 1, 2014/in Indian Gaming, News /by partners

By Ralph B. Saltsman & Stephen Warren Solomon

As published in Indian Country Today – January 7, 2011

Well, do we let the genie out of the bottle? Does this genie lavish untold wealth on its owner or wreak devastation on an established treasured enterprise? By the way, to whom does this genie belong?

In California, state legislation appears from time to time allowing intrastate Internet gaming. One such bill in preliminary discussion in Sacramento and elsewhere would grant a license for Internet intrastate poker to an enterprise consisting of card clubs and Indian tribes. That license would unleash a genie co-owned by those two sets of entities. This bill would allow for online poker and not Class III gaming. What is not included in this discussion is the race track or state lottery.

Class III gaming includes card games played against the house and Las Vegas-style slot machines. In time more than one license could be issued to more than one business entity. This intrastate gaming by definition would be confined to California. Intrastate Internet poker where there is no bank and no percentage take could yield hundreds of millions of dollars.

Internet gaming may: 1) reap billions for its owners; or 2) generate a lot of excitement and
not much else; or 3) diminish the most successful gaming structure in That genie could be key to further
California – Native American land. fortune or could be the self-chosen
means of destruction of the existing
enterprise sustaining so many tribes.

Indian casinos in California are billion dollar industries. According to the National Indian Gaming Commission, California casinos had gross incomes of $7.8 billion in 2007 and $7.36 billion in 2008. No one would consciously want to dismantle or endanger those generous structures. On the other hand, who would want to ignore tomorrow’s multibillion dollar money machine that is Internet gaming?

At present there is no lawful Internet gaming in the United States. In California, through state constitutional amendment, legislation and compacts between tribe and state, Indian casinos have Class III gaming. Card clubs do not. California Indian casinos are holding the cards over the competing card clubs. This could change.

The statistical array of poker players, Internet gamblers and casino patrons is only part of the equation under debate. Regardless of what the numbers show as to who is gambling and how they are doing it, no one can seriously argue the limits and potential for intrastate California Internet gambling. Internet gaming may prove to be without easily predictable limit. But Indian tribes are wrestling with the issue of structure. One very serious argument in opposition to Internet gaming is the inclusion of card clubs into the world of tribal gaming capabilities. Card clubs are not presently part of that success story. Inclusion into an Internet gaming system of card clubs partnered with Indian tribes may be the card clubs’ first step towards intrusion into what is now the tribes’ exclusive domain.

The issue of Indian gaming exclusivity in California raises the perplexing question: Is it in the Indian nation’s best interest to allow intrastate Internet gaming to be born if it means ultimately losing the exclusivity in Class III gaming Indian Nations presently enjoy? The above referenced legislation under early discussion in California would restrict games to poker thereby preserving Indian casinos’ exclusive right to provide Class III gaming, but many in Indian country are wondering out loud if poker is but step one in a continuum of graduated legislation and constitutional amendment that will end with full Class III Internet gambling. At that point, the tribes’ exclusivity is lost, the genie has destroyed the brick and mortar enterprise that has sustained Indian tribes, and there is no putting the genie back in the bottle.

On the other hand, how can Indian nations which had the foresight to create and build casino gaming allow the lucrative opportunity of Internet gaming to pass?

The argument in favor of immediate passage of state legislation permitting Internet intrastate poker, is this gaming will be restricted to poker and not Class III gaming. The sanctity of the Indian casino will be therefore undisturbed. Moreover, failure to act now will allow legal Internet intrastate poker to take off leaving the tribes behind.

Most observers believe Native American However, once allowed the financial wherewithal, cache of success and
tribes can now effectively block gaming the attendant political power, card clubs could have a platform from
legislation. further and additional Internet gaming could be modified by legislation and constitutional amendment by ballot all at card club instigation. Most observers believe Native American tribes can now effectively block gaming legislation. will that still be true when financially successful card clubs participating in a tribal-card cub Internet intrastate poker system go to the legislature and ballot proposition in the future with new laws and constitutional provision allowing Class III Internet gaming?

Those in favor of Internet intrastate poker point out that absent tribal leaders’ foresight in the 1980s and 1990s, the Las Vegas-style casinos on Indian reservation lands would not exist. That foresight now calls for action to take advantage of the computer phenomenon which will grow exponentially with or without tribal participation.

It is also true that when Native Americans won passage of state constitutional amendments and attendant legislation, and the federal government and state law adopted the machinery for Native American casinos with Class III gaming, and the tribes built those casinos, there were no billion dollar casino businesses in California to lose. Now the intricacies of the arguments are dangerous, because the stakes are high.

To some Native Americans contemplating their economic status during the mid-20th century, their memories recall deprivation without the nostalgia for those good old days. That genie could be key to further fortune or could be the self-chosen means of destruction of the existing enterprise sustaining so many Native American tribes and the communities in which those Indian casinos stand.

The decision to allow passage of legislation in California to establish lawful Internet intrastate gaming must be made wisely to protect the existing casinos and, at the same time, provide for the future.

So, do we let this genie out of the bottle? And whose genie is it?

Ralph B. Saltsman is a lawyer with Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson in Los Angeles. He has been a lawyer for 36 years, 34 of which have been in the area of land use licenses and permits. Stephen Warren Solomon practices administrative law at Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson. His expertise centers on licensing and Indian gaming and catastrophic personal injury.

Shakedown Lawsuits: Americans with Disabilities Act

March 1, 2014/in News /by partners

This month’s article is about the proliferation of shake down lawsuits filed under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Though the Act was enacted to help all persons gain equal access to businesses open to the public, that noble beginning has degenerated into a cash cow for attorneys who file hundreds of lawsuits a year looking for quick settlements on behalf of their professional plaintiff clients who claim some injury confers them disabled status.

Southern California News Station KABC recently reported how one southern California attorney had filed more than 500 lawsuits for a single client and despite having made many thousands of dollars, claimed the client could not afford the court filing fee. Moreover, after one owner of a chain of small cafes paid $5,000 to settle a claim because a bathroom mirror was two inches too high, the same attorney was lying in wait and promptly sued him again on behalf of different clients for the same violation!

You say, “But my building was built 60 years ago before these requirements existed.” Too bad. The ADA applies to new construction and existing buildings. If your building has impediments to access for disabled persons, you could be subject to damages claimed by the disabled person, unless there is a legal exception. Generally, under California law, a disabled person can sue for up to $4000 for each violation and because these professional plaintiffs are often seeking to find violations, the amount of claimed damages can far exceed the amount.

Although the professional plaintiffs may just want quick money to go away, we urge all businesses to consult with experienced consel before they settle any cases of this type. Until there is meaningful ADA reform at the state and federal level, businesses are vulnerable to these types of abusive lawsuits. – R. Bruce Evans, Partner

As always, if you want more information, just give us a call.

– From the Law Offices of Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson

Metrolink Train Crash Victim Represented by the Law Firm of Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson is Awarded $2,000,000

March 1, 2014/in Car Accidents, News, Personal Injury /by partners

Playa Del Rey, CA
August 19, 2011

In a lawsuit brought against Metrolink, Connex, and other Defendants, a train passenger and his wife represented by Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson have been awarded $2,000,000 in a recent Los Angeles superior court judgment. The law firm is pleased to have been given the opportunity to succesfully represent this couple in this serious matter.

Stephen A. Jamieson, a partner at Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson, and Soheyl Tahsildoost, an Associate at the firm, prepared and submitted to Judge Lichtman a comprehensive damages evaluation. Injuries suffered included a fractured tibia, compression fractures of the spine, deep wounds on his legs, hematoma, tearing of cartilage in the knee, large joint effusions, cartlage delamination, numerous cuts and bruises, and other injuries. The case was tried to Judge Lichtman on damages.

The clients were injured as a result of a 2008 collision between a commuter train owned by Metrolink and operated by Connex which collided head on with a freight train. Both trains were travelling at approximately 40 miles per hour. Evidence reflected that the conductor of the Metrolink train was texting from his cell phone minutes before the train crash and missed a red light on the tracks. Twenty-four individuals perished in the crash, and nearly 100 others were injured.

As a result of a statutory maximum set by Congress, the maximum that could be recovered by all the victims of this tragic event in total is $200,000,000. Judge Licthman was tasked with allocating among the 124 victims and their families. Judge Lichtman likened this task to “triaging,” whereby he was forced to distribute an inadequate amount among many deserving and badly injured or deceased victim’s families. His own original tentative awards were $64 million in excess of the $200 million cap on recovery.

With over 100 years of combined experience the Law Firm of Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson have achieved many exceptional results in many areas of the law including, but not limited to, obtaining compensation for clients who have suffered serious personal injuries including brain injuries, spinal injuries, broken bones, paralysis, resulting from different types of motor vehicle accidents, construction accidents, and all types of negligence and intentional actions and omissions, caused by transportation agencies and companies, and others.

LEGAL HELP LIVE

March 1, 2014/in Legal Help Live, News /by partners

L.A.’s Newest Cutting-Edge, Super-Lawyers TV Talk Show

Stephen Warren Solomon and Ralph Saltsman, who hosted the popular long-running, KRLA radio talk show, Legal Help Live, recently made the transition from radio to TV. Legal Help Live is now a live, weekly, no-hold barred TV talk show. Think of Car Talk (if the two mechanics were attorneys) meets Larry King.

At Legal Help Live anyone is encouraged to call in and ask a legal question, any question, and get a legal answer. But the show is much more than that. It is informative, entertaining, opinionated and controversial. Featuring live in-studio guests, along with live call-ins, at the unscripted, spontaneous Legal Help Live, what you see and hear is what you get.

Stephen Warren Solomon and Ralph Saltsman, partners in the firm Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson, are passionate, dynamic and successful lawyers who defy the common image of the practice of law. Legal Help Live is entertaining, informative and controversial while offering a valuable community service to those who could not otherwise afford the type of help the attorneys so competently offer to clients ranging from the Catholic Church to Larry Flynt (simultaneously).

“You can tell by their voices, that the people who call in to our show often have nowhere else to go,” explains Stephen Solomon. “Many don’t have computers and so we access and provide information on community help organizations for them. We’re blessed with the opportunity to be able to reach over 1 million people with this show. The appreciation is wonderful and we haven’t had a cross word back yet.”

The always fresh and current breaking-news issues the two friends, colleagues and debaters cover from opposite ends of the political spectrum (Stephen is a conservative, right wing, nominated honorary police officer while Ralph is a liberal left-wing, card-carrying ACLU – American Civil Liberties Union – member) do change things and even save lives!

When they raised the issue of having a heart diffibulator in every school, after a child had died for lack of one, many schools made the equipment mandatory. And, Stephen and Ralph hosted an animal rights forum at Loyola University to bring people together, including the city council, to explore legal ways to stop the killing at the animal shelters. Kids, pets and parents can breathe a little easier on the Solomon, Saltsman and Jamieson watch!

Their radio show had been broadcast from the LA County Fair and the TV home is the Santa Monica City Hall, produced by Emmy award-winning Robin Gee. It is controversial, spontaneous, never rehearsed…and un-censored…so hold onto your hats! Ralph says of the network, “They don’t know how to handle us at all!” It’s also funny. Stephen thoughtfully ponders, “There’s a lot of work in being spontaneous…but it’s worth it! If we are entertaining, people are probably listening and if people are listening, they are probably learning!”

Legal Help Live airs on channel 16 in Santa Monica and channel 36 in Los Angeles every Wednesday from 4 to 5 pm. Repeats of the show also air every day at 4 pm in Santa Monica and on Thursdays from noon to 1 pm in Los Angeles Call in and you never know, you may just win dinner-for-2 at Barney’s Beanery, tickets to Disneyland or a box of Krispy Kremes…and even learn a thing or two while you’re at it!

For further information visit: www.ssjlaw.com

Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson are attorneys practicing in the areas of ABC law, ABC Appeals Board cases, and all related Land Use Matters such as City and County Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Police and Fire permits, Entertainment law, and Gambling Law; as well as Business and Personal Injury litigation. Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson can be reached at 800 405 4222.”

Legal Help Live: Solomon and Saltsman Are All About Public Service

March 1, 2014/in News /by partners

By Contributing Editor, Diana Lesmez
Saturday, May 5, 2007 9:19 PM PDT
The first caller to Legal Help Live is Keira, from Westwood, who wants to know about her rights because on her first day at her new job at a restaurant her boss made a sexual pass at her.

When she rebuffed his advances, he promptly fired her. So now Keira wants to know whether or not she has any legal recourse. These are the types of questions that Stephen Warren Solomon and Ralph Saltsman, hosts of Legal Help Live, field on the air during their weekly, hour-long call-in television show. Broadcasting live from the Santa Monica City Hall council chambers, the show airs on channel 16 in Santa Monica and channel 36 in Los Angeles on Wednesdays at 4 p.m.

Solomon and Saltsman, who are partners at the law firm, Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson, strongly encourage Keira to seek legal representation and to contact the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, as well as the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, in order to start a legal claim of sexual harassment. Before hanging up, Keira seems relieved to learn that she does have recourses available to her and is grateful to the hosts for their guidance.

Legal Help Live encourages callers needing help with a wide-ranging number of legal issues. According to Saltsman, “There’s not an area of personal concern for the public that we have not gotten a call on. Landlord/tenant questions, for example, may entail a landlord who wants to throw out a tenant, or a tenant who is being thrown out.” Adds Solomon, “ The nice part about it, which is amazing, is how much public service we can do on the airways that we can’t physically do as lawyers.” Saltsman agrees. “Wouldn’t it be nice if every lawyer had the opportunity to give back to the community instead of just practicing law for 15 hours a day?”

What makes Legal Help Live a hit, however, is not a staid atmosphere of legal regality. Quite the opposite, as both Solomon and Saltsman are approachable, comfortable on the air, occasionally controversial and always entertaining. Solomon claims that it takes him about 6 hours to prepare for each episode. He and Saltsman do not usually talk about what they’re going to discuss on the air in order to keep their repartee fresh. Because Solomon is a right-wing conservative and Saltsman is a left-wing liberal, they believe that they present both sides of most issues.

The show, which first aired on the radio starting in the year 2000, shifted to television in 2006, and has a potential for reaching an estimated audience of 500,000 to 1 million viewers. In terms of demographics, the callers are racially diverse, ranging in age from teenagers to seniors, slightly more male than female and from all socioeconomic classes. “They’re calling us from multi-million dollar houses and from the streets. We can’t think of a geographic area from which we haven’t gotten a call,” said Saltsman. “We’re mindful of the idea that when a caller asks a question, it is a question of interest and concern to many people. Therefore, the people who are not calling will also benefit from the advice.”

According to SuperLawyers.com, “Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson is the recognized standard bearer in obtaining and retaining alcohol licenses for all types of alcohol sellers…and have successfully represented various tribal communities in their efforts to establish their rights to the many uses of their land.”

Solomon has been practicing law since 1965 and started out representing clients in the adult entertainment industry. Then he ventured into representing police officers and police unions and, as he states, “still kept the naked dancers. The reason I was doing adult entertainment law was that it was alcohol-related.” He adds cheekily, “The fun stuff is sex, alcohol, and gaming.”

Saltsman started his legal career in 1974 as a criminal prosecutor and, in fact, prosecuted some of Solomon’s clients. That’s how they met … and by 1977 Solomon enticed Saltsman to join his law firm.

Solomon and Saltsman have a new show premiering on April 25th and running through June 13th. Homelessness in Our Community is a new call-in production … an 8-week long series airing live from noon to 1 p.m., on Wednesdays. The show is presented by the Westside Hunger & Shelter Coalition in partnership with the City of Santa Monica, and is intended to create a forum for discussion on various possible solutions to this problem.

Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson are attorneys practicing in the areas of ABC law, ABC Appeals Board cases, and all related Land Use Matters such as City and County Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Police and Fire permits, Entertainment law, and Gambling Law; as well as Business and Personal Injury litigation. Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson can be reached at 800 405 4222.”

Ridgetop v. E-Z-GO

March 1, 2014/in News /by partners

By Alexa Hyland
Daily Journal Staff Writer

You’ve teed off on the fifth hole of a golf course nestled in the Angeles National Forest in northern Los Angeles County. You’re driving up the hill toward the green, and suddenly your golf cart stops. If your cart stalls like that enough times during rounds, you may want to relinquish your membership and play elsewhere. And that, the owners of the private Lake Elizabeth Golf & Ranch Club said in a lawsuit, is exactly what several members did.

The suit led to a $1.7 million jury verdict against the Augusta, Ga., makers of E-Z-Go golf cars. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Alan Rosenfield granted the award to course owner Ridgetop Ranch Properties on June 6.
The jury found E-Z-Go breached its warranty and fraudulently misrepresented its product, which the company touts as the No. 1 selling golf car in the world. Ridgetop Ranch Properties Inc. v. Jacobsen E-Z-Go, MC013551 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed April 19, 2002).

“The company kept blaming the problems on the golf course, but at the same time E-Z-Go was also getting complaints from other courses,” lead planitiffs’ lawyer Stephen A. Jamieson said. Jamieson, R. Bruce Evans and Ryan M. Kroll of Playa del Rey’s Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson and Tom Ward of Lancaster’s Michelizzi Schwabacher Ward & Bianchi represented Ridgetop in the suit.

Ridgetop owned and operated the golf course until May 2002, when, according to the complaint, the company sold the property at a diminished price of $5.5 million. The plaintiffs asked for compensatory damages in excess of $3.5 million but were awarded $1.67 million with 10 percent post-judgment interest.

At trial, Ridgetop’s lawyers blamed the course’s golf carts for the low sales price. The attorneys said the club bought 80 carts in 1997 after E-Z-Go sales representatives boasted about a unique feature of the carts: a “controller” that sets the speed for easy use on the course’s hilly terrain. Allegedly, five months after the carts were purchased, they began to break down and eventually became inoperable.

Ridgetop’s lawyers claimed Lake Elizabeth Golf & Ranch Club gained a reputation as an unreliable course and suffered a decrease in the number of rounds played, which led to diminished property values. “We asked for compensatory damages because of loss in profits and decreased value of the property,” Jamieson said. “You make money on the rounds of golf you can provide,” he said. “If players can’t get on a course, they ask for their money back.”
“The carts are the lifeblood of a golf course,” he said.

During the trial, E-Z-Go’s lawyer, Michael S. Sutton of Mission Viejo’s Sutton & Murphy, argued the course’s property value dropped after competitive golf courses opened in the Lancaster area. “There was nothing defective with the vehicles,” Sutton said.

Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson are attorneys practicing in the areas of ABC law, ABC Appeals Board cases, and all related Land Use Matters such as City and County Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Police and Fire permits, Entertainment law, and Gambling Law; as well as Business and Personal Injury litigation. Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson can be reached at 800 405 4222.”

Jury Sides With Course In Cart Warranty Case

March 1, 2014/in News /by partners

by Mike Bailey, August, 2007

Textron Inc. has paid nearly $1.7 million to a California company after a 12-person jury found that its golf car division misrepresented the warranty on a fleet of golf cars.

In a six-week trial that ended in June, a Superior Court of California jury found that E-Z-GO, a division of Textron, was guilty of two counts of breaching its warranty and two counts of fraud in its dealings with Ridgetop Ranch Properties, former owner of Lake Elizabeth (Calif.) Golf and Ranch Club.

Kathy Searle, vice president of the communications for E-Z-GO, said Textron is not planning to appeal, but is disappointed with the decision.

“We maintain the lawsuit is simply a matter of the plaintiff’s attempt to profit from a well-managed, market leader who has a well-documented record of providing high-quality golf cars and exceptional service,” she said.
Searle said Ridgetop Ranch’s claims are inconsistent with what really happened.

“The plaintiff clearly is blaming E-Z-GO for their lack of executing fundamental golf-car maintenance practices,” she said. “We did everything in our power to help the customer resolve the issues they were experiencing due to their lack of maintenance on the vehicles. Our focus always remained on ensuring a wonderful experience for the plaintiff’s course customers.”

According to the complaint, over a period from 1997 to 2001, Lake Elizabeth’s 80 E-Z-GO golf cars broke down, failed, or were inoperable on a weekly basis, rendering numerous golf cars unfit for use. The alleged problems included trouble with their speed controls, which was particularly problematic on Lake Elizabeth’s elevation changes of up to 190 feet.

Ridgetop Ranch officials said in the complaint that E-Z-GO misrepresented claims that the speed controls could be set specifically for Lake Elizabeth. They also said that E-Z-GO employees told them that the golf cars were not defective – but knew all along that the speed controllers on the cars were defective, as they sought reimbursement and credit from Curtis Instruments Inc., which makes the speed controllers. Lake Elizabeth officials also said that E-Z-GO replaced failed speed controllers with similarly defective ones.

According to the complaint, rounds at Lake Elizabeth declined as it gained a reputation as a course that was “unreliable and dangerous,” and, as a result, the course closed in December 2001. The course and another 15 acres were sold six months later for $5.5 million, a figure Ridgetop Ranch officials said was far lower than it would have commanded had the course’s reputation not suffered from the faulty golf cars.

The jury awarded $1.67 million, plus legal fees and 10 percent post-judgment interest. The award compensated for lost rounds and the devaluation of the course, said Stephen Jamieson, lead attorney for Ridgetop Ranch and partner in the Los Angeles law firm Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson.

“I think the biggest factor was that the jury decided that during the process of selling the cars, E-Z-GO lied to them,” Jamieson said. “I think the jury felt that during the process of the cars breaking down that E-Z-GO didn’t tell them the truth, and I think it also made a difference during the trial that E-Z-GO had tried to conceal things.”

Another reason for the large award, Jamieson said, is the ruling that E-Z-GO did not deliver its limited warranty when Ridgeview Ranch signed the contract in 1997. The limited warranty could have protected E-Z-GO against incidental and consequential damages.

“The lesson learned for our company is that we need to maintain better records of the vehicle-care training and service we provide to our customers,” Searle said. “Unfortunately, the plaintiff presented information about our customer-focused activities that was misinterpreted by the jury many years after the fact. Unfortunately we did not have all of the records to back up what truly happened.”

Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson are attorneys practicing in the areas of ABC law, ABC Appeals Board cases, and all related Land Use Matters such as City and County Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Police and Fire permits, Entertainment law, and Gambling Law; as well as Business and Personal Injury litigation. Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson can be reached at 800 405 4222.”

Is a living will enough?

March 1, 2014/in News /by partners

After Terry Schiavo, Americans increasingly want to know how to draw up advance directives—instructions for their care if they become incapacitated and cannot make medical decisions for themselves.

“If you are going to choose one thing to do, it should in most cases be a health care power of attorney,” says James Bernat, M.D. a neurologist and chairman of the ethics program at the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon, N.H. That document gives a person you select the legal right to make decisions for you if you no longer can. It’s important to discuss your preferences with your proxy, and with other family members so they will support the proxy’s decisions.

Living wills are another kind of advance directive, but many experts say they should be used only in conjunction with a health care power of attorney. Living wills often are ineffective because they are too vague or they try to cover every possible medical contingency. Another drawback—many people fail to give their living wills to their doctors.

Each state has legal guidelines for advance directives. To learn more go to:

AARP, www.aarp.org . Click on “Care and Family” and then on “End of Life.”
National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, www.caringinfo.org . You can download your state’s advance directive forms.
U.S. Living Will Registry at www.uslivingwillregistry.com .
The American Bar Association’s Commission on Law and Aging at www.abanet.org/aging . Click on “The Consumer’s Tool Kit for Health Care Decisionmaking Worksheets.”
The Center for Practical Bioethics walks you through the care-planning process with its “Caring Conversations,” in English or Spanish at www.midbio.org/mbc-cc.htm .
–Leah Glasheen
AARP Bulletin/May 2005

“Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson are attorneys practicing in the areas of ABC law, ABC Appeals Board cases, and all related Land Use Matters such as City and County Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Police and Fire permits, Entertainment law, and Gambling Law; as well as Business and Personal Injury litigation. Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson can be reached at 800 405 4222.”

Largest Verdict For Fraud Ever Rendered For Deception Related To E-Z-Go Golf Cars. Fraud Judgment For 1.67 Million Dollars Entered Against Textron Inc.

Fraud Found by Jury Against a Real Estate Broker

FROM INDIAN COUNTRY TODAY Saltsman and Solomon: Letting the genie out of the bottle?

Shakedown Lawsuits: Americans with Disabilities Act

Metrolink Train Crash Victim Represented by the Law Firm of Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson is Awarded $2,000,000

LEGAL HELP LIVE

Legal Help Live: Solomon and Saltsman Are All About Public Service

Ridgetop v. E-Z-GO

Jury Sides With Course In Cart Warranty Case

Is a living will enough?

LOS ANGELES OFFICE

BAY AREA OFFICE

PORTLAND OFFICE

Current Affairs & Latest News

COVID-19 Crisis: Important Questions To Ask