Subrogation – S | M | S – Siegel, Moreno & Stettler, APC – Workers' Compensation Subrogation and Property Subrogation

It’s Hotter than a Summer Day in California: Igniting Your Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Settlements

It’s Hotter than a Summer Day in California: Igniting Your Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Settlements Best Practices to Maximize Recovery at Mediation The Importance of Teamwork in Settlements Effective worker’s compensation settlements are a product of cohesive teamwork. The typical team includes: Third-Party Administrator Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Specialist Civil Subrogation Workers’ Compensation Adjuster Workers’ Compensation Defense Attorney Workers’ Compensation Carrier Workers’ Compensation Carrier’s Subrogation Specialist AOE/COE Investigator Consistent communication among team members is crucial. Key players such as the Subrogation Attorney and the Worker’s Compensation Defense Attorney must keep others informed about developments in the civil action and proceedings before the Worker’s Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). Regular roundtables before key events help in coordinating and planning strategies. Tailoring the Settlement Plan Every case is unique, and the optional settlement plan depends on various factors known to different team members. For example: Claims representatives might not know the limitations of closing the worker’s compensation claim before the civil subrogation case is settled. Subrogation representatives may be unaware of significant claims issued that could influence an early settlement decision. Subrogation attorneys might not recognize the long-standing relationship between the employer and carrier. These diverse perspectives need to be integrated into the settlement strategy. Team members should proactively share critical information, including deposition transcripts, PQME reports, investigative reports, and witness statements. Early Settlement Goal Formulation Identify the possibility of a Third-Party Compromise & Release early. If not feasible, determine the best timing for a Compromise & Release. Assess whether a lien is sufficient or if active participation is warranted. For large cases, suggest that Plaintiff’s civil counsel make policy limits demand to open the civil third-party insurance policy, which can increase the potential recovery for both Plaintiff and WCAB credits. Counter-Intuitive Subrogation Mediation Subrogation in the civil arena can sometimes benefit from unconventional approaches. Rather than aiming for the highest possible direct monetary recovery, a settlement that stipulates credit or a third-party compromise and release might be more advantageous. This approach can close high-exposure claims, providing long-term benefits over immediate cash. Effective Mediation Briefs Primary Briefs should not educate the opponent on weaknesses but should coordinate with Plaintiff’s counsel to strengthen the Plaintiff’s case. Early filing allows the mediator and opponents to prepare adequately. A back-up brief should anticipate and counter the opponent’s best arguments assertively. Addressing Common Issues in Mediation Employer Fault Gather comparable reported cases for fault apportionment determinations. Use a WC Calculator to run scenarios of proportional fault and establish an “employer fault threshold” that must be exceeded for employer reimbursement. Privette Doctrine Remember, the Privette Doctrine may only bar claims against the general contractor, not the subcontractor primarily responsible for the injury. Collect evidence supporting the general contractor’s causation of injury through targeted discovery. Mediation: Subro Waiver and Common Fund Issues Ensure all conditions subsequent are performed and obtain all relevant insurance documents. Be prepared to show evidence of active participation and highlight key entries in subrogation attorney fees that are pertinent to the subrogation claim. Calculating Litigation Costs Get specific litigation costs from the Plaintiff’s attorney, at least a best estimate, for proportional Common Fund litigation cost calculation. Clarify that requesting this information does not admit that the Common Fund applies. Civil Rules Changes and Mediator’s Role Recent changes in civil rules have redefined the legal meanings of “writing” and “signing” (Cal. Ev. Code 250, Cal. State Bar Rule 1.0.1). The mediator’s role includes facilitating settlements while ensuring that the agreements are legally binding and enforceable. Critical Settlement Information Prepare alternative drafts of settlement documents like Release, Third-Party Compromise & Release, Compromise & Release, Stipulation & Award, and Finding & Award. Specify the principal terms, payees, timing of payment, and order of events. Mediation Privilege and Waiver Mediation remains a confidential process under Evidence Code Section 1119. Attorneys must provide clients with a printed disclosure of these confidentiality restrictions and obtain a signed acknowledgement (Evidence Code Section 1129). Conclusion Successful worker’s compensation subrogation settlements require a well-coordinated team effort, early goal formation, and a strategic approach to mediation. Keeping record of legal changes and ensuring clear communication and documentation can significantly enhance recovery and outcomes. Search for: Search Archives Archives Select Month September 2026 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 August 2017 Subscribe To Our Blog First Name Last Name Email * Edit Template

It’s Hotter than a Summer Day in California: Igniting Your Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Settlements Read More »

Successfully Identifying Workers’ Comp Recovery Opportunities

Subrogation, Workers' Compenstation / admin

Successfully Identifying Workers’ Comp Recovery Opportunities Subrogation in the context of Workers’ Compensation A day in the life of a Worker’s Compensation Claims Professional can be hectic to say the least! New losses that demand immediate attention come in continually. Each claim brings in calls and correspondence from applicant attorneys, doctors, employers, case managers, investigators, defense attorneys, lien claimants, and injured workers. Each request for treatment and report brings rules and deadlines around every corner. Supervisors require diary review, updates, and plans of action, and clients seek account audits. And on top of all that, the claims professional is also responsible for identifying subrogation recovery potential for each claim. That picture is daunting, but subrogation does not have to be a thorn in the claims professional’s side. Familiarity with basic workers’ compensation subrogation fact patterns and the steps to take once they have been identified can ease this task. In general, subrogation in the context of a workers’ compensation case comes in several distinct fact patterns. Motor vehicle accidents Construction site accidents Premises liability Products liability Miscellaneous patterns Let us explore some fundamentals for each. Motor vehicle accidents (MVA’s) MVA’s are the easiest fact pattern to identify with subrogation potential. When a report comes in that mentions an injury that was caused by a car accident, subrogation should be pursued to determine who was at fault for the accident. Some initial and quick steps can be completed to insure proper investigation is completed and recovery is obtained. These include: 1. Securing a copy of the police report is key for this purpose. Once the report is received, the responsible driver and owner should be put on notice of the carrier’s intent to pursue subrogation. 2. A demand must be made for the insured to open a claim with their auto insurance carrier. 3. A request should be made to the employer and employee for any photographs of the vehicles involved, documentation of any repairs made to the vehicles involved, and a statement made by anyone involved in the accident or who witnessed it. Construction site accidents Accidents on construction sites come in all shapes and sizes. Early identification of subrogation potential is paramount because the scene of the accident and instrumentation involved often can change quickly. Even a short delay of a few days in getting a subrogation inquiry up and running can prejudice the chances of recovery. Thus, when an injury comes in and the employer identifies the accident locale as a construction site, an immediate subrogation review needs to be done. Common fact patterns include: Injuries involving heavy machinery or scaffolding Falls from heights Materials falling and striking workers Failures to guard against dangerous conditions Once subrogation potential is identified, requests should be made for: Witness statements OSHA reports Contractor reports Premises liability – slip, trip, and fall scenarios These cases are the most often overlooked by claims professionals and insured employers. They are also often discounted quickly on the assumption that it was nothing more than an accident caused by the injured worker not paying attention. While contributory fault of the injured worker is a consideration in all premises liability cases, it does not mean that there is no subrogation potential. Any time an injury involves a slip, trip, fall, or some other accident caused by an encounter with a condition present on the property, the claims professional should take a moment to step back and consider whether a third party was involved in creating the condition that led to the injury. Once identified, photographs of the condition responsible for the injury should be secured immediately. Products liability These cases have the most obvious fact patterns but can be the most expensive and problematic to pursue. Whenever an injury occurs due to an encounter with a machine, tool, or piece of equipment, subrogation should be considered. Discussions with the employer and employee should focus on whether a defect or failure of the equipment contributed to the accident. Quite often, these situations involve contributory fault of the injured worker and employer surrounding misuse of equipment or failure to train. Nonetheless, if the scope of the injury is large, at least a basic analysis of product design or manufacturer defects should be completed. Securing a copy of the OSHA report often can assist in the fact gathering and analysis of the issues involved. In very serious cases, an expert should be consulted early on to inspect the product. Ultimately, these cases hinge on the testimony and opinion of an expert concerning the product. Miscellaneous patterns Not all subrogation fact patterns fit neatly into a category. Any time an accident occurs and you find yourself asking, “How did that happen?”, It is probably a good indication that there may be subrogation potential. Follow that intuition by asking questions of the employer and employee to determine whether a third party potentially could be involved in the cause of the injury. If there is ever a doubt, it is better to be safe than sorry. Remember, help is always available from subrogation specialists, vendors, or attorneys who can assist with the questions to ask and evidence to preserve to make sure that subrogation opportunities are not missed. A phone call is all it takes to get started! Search for: Search Archives Archives Select Month September 2026 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 August 2017 Subscribe To Our Blog First Name Last Name Email * Edit Template

Successfully Identifying Workers’ Comp Recovery Opportunities Read More »

Beware only filing a subrogation lien

Subrogation / admin

Beware only filing a subrogation lien If your work comp subrogation action involves the death of the injured worker, best practice is that you file an independent subrogation action to protect the statute. Doing anything short of that could spell disaster for your recovery efforts and net a zero in recovery. Here’s a situation: An insured worker dies in a motor vehicle accident that was not his fault. Subrogation potential! The work comp carrier pays out a substantial sum to settle the claim. The injured worker’s family gets a personal injury attorney and files a lawsuit. The employer/carrier does not file suit to protect the statute. Instead, the employer/carrier just communicates with the plaintiff attorney and waits to assert its lien off the personal injury settlement. The case settles and plaintiff dismisses his case without paying the comp carrier. The plaintiff attorney for the worker’s family tells the carrier that there was only one cause of action for wrongful death and the carrier’s lien doesn’t attach it. He is not reimbursing the carrier a dime. The plaintiff attorney is RIGHT! I’ll discuss the details below. Don’t get caught If there is a death claim, never file a lien OR an intervention. The only real way to protect yourself is by filing a separate complaint to protect the statute. Because: The lien could end up being worthless depending on how the plaintiff attorney crafts the complaint. Intervention may fail as well for the same reason the lien fails. Employer/carrier has no recovery rights for wrongful death so it doesn’t protect their rights or toll the statute. Relevant Law: Wrongful Death:CCP § 377.60 establishes a separate statutory cause of action in favor of specified heirs of a person who dies as a result of the “wrongful act or neglect” of another. Under a wrongful death cause of action, the specified heirs are entitled to recover damages on their own behalf for the loss they have sustained by reason of the bodily injury victim’s death. [See Corder v. Corder (2007) 41 C4th 644, 651, 61 CR3d 660, 664; Fitch v. Select Products Co. (2005) 36 C4th 812, 819, 31 CR3d 591, 595; Boeken v. Philip Morris USA Inc. (2013) 217 CA4th 992, 997, 159 CR3d 195, 198 (discussed at ¶ 3:2242)] The elements of a wrongful death action are a tort (negligence or other wrongful act), resulting death (causation), and loss (damages) suffered by the heirs. When the tort is negligence, plaintiff must, of course, prove defendant’s duty and breach thereof. [Lattimore v. Dickey (2015) 239 CA4th 959, 968, 191 CR3d 766, 773; Jacoves v. United Merchandising Corp. (1992) 9 CA4th 88, 105, 11 CR2d 468, 478]. “Survival” action:A wrongful death claim is separate and distinct from the victim’s action which “survives” to the estate under CCP § 377.20 (¶ 3:285 ff.). Whereas damages recovered in a “survival” action belong to the victim’s estate, damages recoverable in a wrongful death action belong to the parties-plaintiff personally—wrongful death damages are not part of the victim’s estate and do not descend through the estate. [CCP § 377.60; see Castaneda v. Department of Corrections & Rehab. (2013) 212 CA4th 1051, 1063, 151 CR3d 648, 656-657; Adams v. Sup.Ct. (Centinella Freeman Regional Med. Ctr.) (2011) 196 CA4th 71, 78-79, 126 CR3d 186, 192; also see Ross & Cohen, Cal. Prac. Guide: Probate (TRG), Ch. 15] Damagesrecoverablein WD Action:As a general rule, each wrongful death claimant is entitled to damages for all detriment personally suffered and is likely to suffer in the future because of decedent’s death. The measure of damages is not limited to out-of-pocket losses; rather, it covers the total value of the benefits the claimants could reasonably expect to receive had decedent lived. [Corder v. Corder (2007) 41 C4th 644, 663, 61 CR3d 660, 674; Boeken v. Philip Morris USA Inc. (2013) 217 CA4th 992, 997-998, 159 CR3d 195, 198-199; Allen v. Toledo (1980) 109 CA3d 415, 423, 167 CR 270, 275; CACI 3921 (death of adult), 3922 (death of minor); and see BAJI 14.50, 14.52] Damages recoverable by estate in CCP § 377.30 “survivor” action:Expressly excluded from a wrongful death recovery are damages awardable under CCP § 377.34 to compensate the estate for detriment decedent personally suffered before death. [CCP § 377.61] Thus, wrongful death claimants are not entitled to damages for: Medical expenses incurred by decedent prior to death; Decedent’s wage losses or impaired earning capacity; Decedent’s pain and suffering and/or damages for disfigurement. [See Fitch v. Select Products Co. (2005) 36 C4th 812, 819, 31 CR3d 591, 595; Corder v. Corder (2007) 41 C4th 644, 661, 61 CR3d 660, 672; DeMeo v. St. Francis Hosp. (1974) 39 CA3d 174, 176-177, 114 CR 280, 281-282] Workers’ compensation “recoupment” rights:An employer or insurer is entitled to bring an action against a third party tortfeasor to recover payments made as a proximate result of injury to or death of an employee (including death benefits paid to the Department of Industrial Relations in cases of decedents without dependents). [Lab.C. § 3852] This “recoupment” right derives from the tort remedy the injured employee would have had but for the death.It is wholly distinct from the § 377.60 claimant’s independent (nonderivative) right to sue for decedent’s wrongful death. [Eli v. Travelers Indem. Co. (1987) 190 CA3d 901, 235 CR 704] Contact me for information about how you can protect yourself against wrongful death suits. Search for: Search Archives Archives Select Month September 2026 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 August 2017 Subscribe To Our Blog First Name Last Name Email * Edit Template

Beware only filing a subrogation lien Read More »

Fix discovery issues before fixing the rate

COVID-19, Subrogation / admin

Fix discovery issues before fixing the rate Once again, my desire to read got the better of me as I opened an article on WorkCompCentral from 1/27/22 regarding a revised fee schedule for copy services. The great State of California Division of Workers’ Compensation is proposing an increase of the flat rate for copy services, as well as some other proposed language. Please bear in mind as you read my rant below that I am not implying copy services should not be reimbursed. Quite the contrary. I use copy services all the time and they are valuable in the discovery process. What bothers me is the fact that the DWC would consider increasing fees for the benefit of copy services while at the same time not creating or even recommending a uniform set of procedures for each and every WCAB to adhere to when it comes to disputes. Yes, we have the “lien” process, and yes, we have the non-IBR Petition process. But most of the disputes I run encounter should never even have to get to either of those two points. Let me explain, and let the rant begin! A little reminder and stroll through history I drafted an article in 2020 regarding SB 863 (here), and discussed the changes made in that bill as well as some of the tricks surrounding copy service providers and their response to the same. Call me shocked, but most items that I discussed two years ago are prevalent today. 8CCR §9982(d)(1) was drafted specifically to address a reasonable timeframe for the defendant to comply with a request for records. Yet I find myself time after time looking at subpoenas issued the day of, or a few days after the date on the top of a Notice of Representation or an Application. And so, I tell my client to let the subpoena and/or representation notice (whichever is earlier) to serve as the start date of the request for documentation and to serve the documents that are requested. Most of the time they do. And what happens? Pretty much without fail, the copy service proceeds with moving forward with the subpoenas immediately. And so, I object timely and most of the time file a Petition to quash. And this is where the first problem arises. First, if we DON’T file to quash, the copy service company will inevitably argue that we needed to and by not, they have a valid basis for requesting payment. Which I disagree with. Why should we be forced to spend the time and cost of filing a Petition and potentially going to a hearing over a service that under the CCP should not have occurred? Our objection should be sufficient. But I digress…. When said Petition is filed, I would give a rough estimate of about half of the WCJ’s in the State will review and address the Petition on the merits. I always try to include all the evidence needed to render a decision without a hearing, and then some. And so, with the half of Judges who will address the Petition immediately, I will either get an Order Quashing or sometimes an Order Denying if I happened to have missed something or was unclear. I admit it, I am not perfect, though close to it in this regard. Of the remaining half of Judges, they fall into two camps: 1. The Judge will issue an Order Deferring action and set the matter for a hearing: I think this is nothing more than an attempt to avoid ruling on the issue and forcing the parties to address a file and serve that almost always has already happened. This hearing can have some benefit as most of the time we can work out our differences with applicant’s attorney, but the end result is time and money for my client to address an arguably improper subpoena request. And if applicant’s counsel cancels the subpoena request, I will inevitably get a bill for the cancellation at $75.00. And then there are the times when we cannot come to an agreement and the court simply defers the matter until after the case in chief resolves. As a side note this appearance can tend to clog an already clogged appearance calendar. Curiously, this tactic seems to fall in line with the “meet and confer” language I will discuss later on. 2. The Judge will deny the request for an Order Quashing and will indicate something to the effect of that the applicant can pursue discovery, but the defendant may not be liable for the costs: I think this is a colossal mistake and does nothing but lead to litigation and costs that do not need to exist on a claim. I cannot tell you how many times I have had a Judge tell me that if I am right, I will prevail in the end whether it be through the non-IBR process, or a lien. But why should the defendant spend the time and costs of having to prove we are right months or years later? All this does is breathe life into a dying subpoena and drag the issue out when it does not need to be. My first response to the fee schedule proposal is to address the issue of improper subpoenas and then have a conversation on the cost of doing business for each valid subpoena. Proposed language in §9985 notes disputes may be resolved by the filing of a petition at the WCAB. So does this require the court to address at the time of filing, or will they continue to sometimes address and sometimes not as noted above? The article also discusses the specific language disallowing payment for services provided within 30 days of the written request. Wonderful! This should not even be subject to debate! But why is the DWC not also indicating in the same spirit of this language a provision that in the event of a premature or improper request, the defendant merely has

Fix discovery issues before fixing the rate Read More »

A story of in-person litigation in the new normal

Subrogation / admin

A story of in-person litigation in the new normal The month was April, the year: 2021. Most California counties had ceased civil jury trials for about a year and the previous winter had been especially deadly for our state. It was a sad time; friends and coworkers near and dear got very sick and loved ones were lost. The county where this subject workers’ compensation subrogation case was venued had not yet held a civil jury since closing for Covid in 2020. But our trial date of April 19, 2021 was fast approaching. All counsel involved in the case were reaching out to their contacts to determine if any jury trials were even happening. The courts in California had been purposely closed-lipped about trial dates to force parties to continue to litigate, prepare for trial and hopefully settle in order to ease the tsunami of cases set to bear down on a court system. The answer that all counsel got was unanimous: “There is no way your case is going out for trial.” Then came the call from the court. They set an emergency Mandatory Settlement Conference by Zoom, of course, to try to get our case resolved. When that failed the Judge came into the group chat room and told us news we were all equally shocked to hear: our case was assigned a courtroom and trial was going to start on schedule. The date of injury of this case was 2016. The case was close to violating the rule requiring cases to be tried or dismissed within five years. So, our case had priority. We were going to be the first Covid jury trial to go out in that department since the shutdown began. Even though the news was delivered firsthand, there was still a feeling that it was not actually going to start. Nonetheless, the crazy rush trial prep began. Fifteen expert depositions in two weeks, all done by remote means. Nonstop trial prep and document exchange all done by eservice. Seventy-hour work weeks. It was really happening. Flying up for the trial was my first time on a plane, in an Uber and in a hotel since March 2020. When I arrived in the city, one of the largest in the nation, it felt like a ghost town. The storefronts were shuttered. There was no one on the streets. The hotel was vacant and only operating with a skeleton crew and very minimal amenities. It felt more like a post-apocalyptic movie than real life. The trial started. The courthouse was empty: no one in the hallways, no line to go through metal detectors, no sign of attorneys or staff or jurors or the public. It felt like the courthouse was all ours. The Judge informed us that we were all–judge, deputy, clerk included–guinea pigs in the first post-Covid jury trial experience. Masks were always mandatory. No eating! Drinking was only permitted by straw with a very specific method of lifting the mask up, not pulling it down. Social distancing requirements were in place. No more than one counsel at a table. Extra tables had to be brought in. Mine was a small folding table I shared with the AV console – but that’s subrogation for you. No walking around the well! Openings, closings, direct and cross would all be done while seated (and wearing a mask, of course). Imagine a trial where the jury never gets to see anything but counsel’s eyes. Same with all the witnesses. So much of what we have learned as people, how to read credibility and build rapport, is based on reading faces. How was this going to work when that key feature of human interaction was not in play? Would the jury be able to tell who they liked and did not like? Could they tell who they believed and did not believe without seeing lips and expressions? Humor, anger, sadness, and seriousness is all expressed in the face. Would the jury recognize a light joke without the accompanying smile? Another issue with testimony, in addition to masks, was that many witnesses would be permitted to appear by Zoom. The court was encouraging remote testimony, if possible, to alleviate courthouse capacity concerns. The jury questionnaire was geared towards vetting these issues and testing the jurors’ bias against masks and remote testimony. The answers bore out these issues as potential jurors raised concerns about the failure of witnesses to testify in person and expressed concerns about the veracity of remote testimony. Jury selection was one of the more dramatic differences. Only sixteen jurors were allowed in the room at a time for voir dire. That meant counsel had to do the same voir dire set over and over and over again for the nine groups of jurors that were brought up. Many jurors were excused because of fears of catching the virus, caring for loved ones with the virus, childcare issues due to schools being remote due to the pandemic and vaccination appointments. Sometimes out of a group of sixteen only six jurors would be viable after COVID-related excuses were done with. Once the jury was finally empaneled, they were not allowed in the jury box. The jurors were spread out throughout the galley area where the public would normally sit. Yes, that always meant that the attorneys had their backs to the jury. We could not see their faces, their reactions, nor their note taking in response to witness direct and cross. For the most part we had no idea what their reactions were; we had few clues as trial progressed as to what was going through their minds. Witnesses were confined to the back corner of the court room to stay as far away from everyone else as possible. This required all parties to chip in funds to have the courtroom completely wired and fitted with large monitors in three areas of the courtroom. The witnesses talked to a computer on the witness stand which then projected the

A story of in-person litigation in the new normal Read More »

County-specific guidelines – September 18

COVID-19, Subrogation / admin

County-specific guidelines – September 18 We’re continuing to monitor the California Superior Court’s response to COVID-19. One thing can be said for sure: no uniformity is emerging as to how each of the 58 California counties are responding to the pandemic. Some of the more rural counties (think Trinity, Lassen, Del Norte) are business as usual – barring disruptions caused by wildfires – while more urban jurisdictions (Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco) have more or less thrown their hands in the air. These counties have postponed most civil cases indefinitely. They say the wheels will start moving in 2021, but who knows? Add to that, California as a whole has a $168 million shortfall in its budget for trial court operations due to COVID-19 crisis. This has resulted in some jurisdictions moving to fully remote operations, furloughing staff and/or closing courthouses altogether. Take a look at our updated REPORT on how each county superior court is responding to the pandemic. After months of monitoring the situation at the county level, we have learned that some counties are fairly agile and adaptive. Others seem to lack a clear strategy (see: all of the counties in the report that are listed as “no update” month after month). That’s California, though: The Wild West. All of the counties get to decide for themselves how justice is handled in their respective constituencies. It’s been that way since 1849. Lucky for you, SMS Subrogation practices Statewide in all 58 jurisdictions so you do not need to solve this confusing puzzle. Let us handle that for you. We are a phone call or email away and willing to answer any questions you may have. Stay safe – SMS Subrogation Search for: Search Archives Archives Select Month September 2026 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 August 2017 Subscribe To Our Blog First Name Last Name Email * Edit Template

County-specific guidelines – September 18 Read More »

County-specific guidelines – August 5

COVID-19, Subrogation / admin

County-specific guidelines – August 5 We’re continuing to monitor the California Superior Court’s response to COVID-19. Last month, we saw a loosening of restrictions. August, however, brings a mixed bag as California grapples with a surge in COVID-19 cases. While the state sets rules as far as statutes of limitations, each of the 58 counties can decide for themselves to what extent their courts are operating. Some smaller jurisdictions that were previously spared the worst of the pandemic (Butte and Imperial Counties, to name a few) have now greatly restricted court access as cases there have spiked. Other larger jurisdictions, like Marin and Orange Counties are proceeding as though remote court proceedings are going to be the norm. These jurisdictions and others have invested in new remote conferencing technologies that don’t seem temporary. In another interesting finding, a lot of courts are moving away from CourtCall in favor of the pandemic’s darling platform, Zoom. To see where each county stands, refer to our updated REPORT. Please reach out to us with any questions! Search for: Search Archives Archives Select Month September 2026 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 August 2017 Subscribe To Our Blog First Name Last Name Email * Edit Template

County-specific guidelines – August 5 Read More »

County-specific guidelines – June 25

COVID-19, Subrogation / admin

County-specific guidelines – June 25 We’re continuing to monitor the California Superior Court’s response to COVID-19. It’s a mixed bag. Some courts are fully open with social distancing rules in place, others are still deferring to ZOOM and CourtCall. Others are, shall we say, vague. For those, we will reach out for specifics when necessary. To see where each county stands, refer to our updated REPORT. Search for: Search Archives Archives Select Month September 2026 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 August 2017 Subscribe To Our Blog First Name Last Name Email * Edit Template

County-specific guidelines – June 25 Read More »

County-specific guidelines – May 8

COVID-19, Subrogation / admin

County-specific guidelines – May 8 We’re continuing to monitor the California Superior Court’s response to COVID-19. California appears to be thawing slowly. Today, Governor Newsom lifted restrictions on an ever-expanding list of businesses to resume operations. The 58 county Superior Courts are also easing restrictions and opening up more and more services. Few have gone back to business as usual and some are still completely closed, but we can now see a light at the end of the tunnel. To see where each county stands, refer to our updated REPORT. Please reach out to us with any questions. Stay safe – SMS Subrogation Search for: Search Archives Archives Select Month September 2026 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 August 2017 Subscribe To Our Blog First Name Last Name Email * Edit Template

County-specific guidelines – May 8 Read More »

County-specific guidelines – April 22

COVID-19, Subrogation / admin

County-specific guidelines – April 22 We’re continuing to monitor the California Superior Court’s response to COVID-19. Most of the 58 Superior Courts in California have extended their closures into May. It looks like May 12 is the most popular date they have chosen to reopen, but if the past few weeks have been any indication, these closures will likely be extended. Many courts are allowing hearings to take place remotely and most allow electronic document submission. Others are completely closed for business. To see the status of each court, take a look at our updated REPORT Please contact us with any questions. Stay safe – SMS Search for: Search Archives Archives Select Month April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 August 2017 Subscribe To Our Blog First Name Last Name Email * Edit Template

County-specific guidelines – April 22 Read More »