
USF Pays $3.8M Settlement Over Labor Law Violations
The University of San Francisco finalized a $3.8 million settlement to resolve claims that the institution systematically underpaid its non-exempt workforce. Former employees Dan Beck and Bienvenida Salazar led the class action, alleging the university had failed to calculate overtime rates correctly and denied staff mandatory rest periods. After years of legal maneuvering in San Francisco Superior Court, Judge Ethan P. Schulman approved the multimillion-dollar payout to compensate hundreds of a...
Read MoreRecent Articles
Are You an Expert Witness?
Increase your visibility and get more cases
Top Areas of Law
Latest Verdicts & Settlements

USF Pays $3.8M Settlement Over Labor Law Violations
January 5, 2026
The University of San Francisco finalized a $3.8 million settlement to resolve claims that the institution systematically underpaid its non-exempt workforce. Former employees Dan Beck and Bienvenida Salazar led the class action, alleging the university had failed to calculate overtime rates correctly and denied staff mandatory rest periods. After years of legal maneuvering in San Francisco Superior Court, Judge Ethan P. Schulman approved the multimillion-dollar payout to compensate hundreds of affected workers for lost wages and legal penalties.

Salud Data Breach: $8M Class Action Settlement Details
January 5, 2026
In March 2024, Michelle Hedges filed a class action lawsuit against Bona Fide Mao Inc. (doing business as Salud) in the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco. The litigation followed a severe cybersecurity incident occurring in September 2022, which compromised the sensitive personal and medical data of thousands of individuals. The core of the complaint alleged that Salud failed to implement industry-standard security measures—such as robust encryption—and significantly delayed notifying victims. Although the breach was discovered in late 2022, notification letters were not dispatched until February 2024, leaving victims unaware of their exposure for nearly eighteen months. The stolen data included Social Security numbers, medical histories, and health insurance details, placing class members at a lifelong risk of identity theft. To resolve claims of negligence and privacy invasion, Salud agreed to an $8,000,000 settlement. During a final approval hearing on November 20, 2024, the Honorable Ethan P. Schulman requested additional data regarding the class participation rate before granting final judgment. The proceedings reflect a growing judicial scrutiny over corporate accountability in the wake of "Private Information" (PI) exposure.

Jury Awards $382K in Walnut Creek DUI Wrongful Death Case
January 2, 2026
A Contra Costa County jury awarded $382,403 to Rafael Leon after finding Briana Day negligent in the drunk driving death of his daughter Maricarmen Leon. On July 30, 2022, Day drove her RAM 1500 truck onto a Walnut Creek sidewalk while intoxicated at more than twice the legal limit, striking and killing Maricarmen Leon. Day previously pleaded guilty to felony vehicular manslaughter. The jury awarded $100,000 for past loss of companionship, $250,000 for future loss, and $32,403 for funeral expenses, but declined to award punitive damages.

$455K Settlement for Wage Theft in Logistics Class Action
January 2, 2026
The Alameda County Superior Court formally concluded the class and representative action Oscar Armando Maravilla v. East Bay Logistics, Inc. with the final approval of a settlement totaling $455,000. The lawsuit began in July 2022 when Mr. Maravilla, a former non-exempt employee, asserted that the East Bay logistics company had systematically violated the California Labor Code. The complaint detailed widespread wage and hour infractions, including the company's failure to accurately track and pay employees for all time they had worked, leading to underpayment of both minimum wage and overtime. The legal action further contended that East Bay Logistics had denied workers their legally mandated meal and rest periods, and subsequently failed to pay the premium wages required for these missed breaks. Additionally, the company provided employees with inaccurate wage statements and neglected to reimburse them for necessary business expenses, such as the use of personal cell phones for work. East Bay Logistics denied the allegations, asserting that it had operated in good faith. However, to avoid the considerable risk and expense of a jury trial, the parties negotiated the six-figure settlement. In September 2024, Judge Michael Markman approved the final order, which provided compensation to the class members for the wages and penalties the company had failed to pay, officially concluding the litigation.

COIT Cleaning Pays $375K for Marble Damage, Shattered Wrist
January 2, 2026
Stahl-Lee v. Coit Cleaning & Restoration: $375,000 Settlement Ends Dispute Over Toxic Damage

$2.5M Punitive Verdict in Florida Wrong-Way DUI Death Case
January 2, 2026
A Duval County jury returned a $2.5 million punitive damages verdict against Ramon Gerardo Cerda for causing a fatal wrong-way collision on Interstate 295. Cerda drove his pickup truck southbound in the northbound lanes while intoxicated, striking and killing Nell Marie Behr in the early morning hours of January 14, 2023. The verdict reflected the jury's finding that Cerda acted with gross negligence and reckless disregard for human life.

Jury Rules for Homeowners in $213K Falling Tree Damage Case
January 1, 2026
In a subrogation lawsuit filed in Butte County Superior Court, Fire Insurance Exchange sought to recover $213,446.26 from property owners Gary and Helen Botsford after a tree from their Paradise, California property fell and damaged a neighboring home in October 2021. While the jury found the Botsfords were negligent in maintaining their trees, they concluded this negligence was not a substantial factor in causing the damage. Judge Stephen E. Benson entered judgment favoring the defendants on October 22, 2025, awarding them costs of suit and denying the insurance company any recovery.

Jury Rules for Defense in Connecticut Wrongful Birth Case
January 1, 2026
A Connecticut jury delivered a defense verdict on October 30, 2025, in a wrongful birth medical malpractice lawsuit filed by Lyanne Santos-Reyes against her obstetric care providers. Santos-Reyes alleged that Dr. Rachel L. Leonardi and Naugatuck Valley Women's Health Specialists failed to detect her daughter's spina bifida during prenatal ultrasounds in 2018, depriving her of the opportunity to terminate the pregnancy. The plaintiff claimed the August 2018 ultrasounds failed to properly visualize the fetal spine, and she was never informed about incomplete anatomical views or offered additional testing. Her daughter was born with meningomyelocele, the most severe form of spina bifida, requiring lifetime care. The defendants denied all negligence claims, and the jury found in their favor on all issues.

Steak 48 Settles Wage & Hour Class Action for $252,000
January 1, 2026
On April 17, 2025, the Los Angeles County Superior Court granted final approval for a class action settlement between plaintiffs Marina Durham and Cassandra Hall-LePrevost and defendant Steak 48 Beverly Hills, LLC. The litigation, which consolidated two separate complaints, alleged that the high-end dining establishment engaged in systematic labor violations, including the failure to authorize required rest periods and meal breaks, and the failure to pay minimum and overtime wages for all hours worked. The plaintiffs, representing a class of non-exempt employees who worked at the restaurant between November 20, 2019, and June 27, 2024, also claimed the employer failed to reimburse business expenses related to uniform cleaning and provided inaccurate wage statements. Under the terms of the agreement, Steak 48 will pay a Gross Settlement Amount of $252,000 to resolve the claims without admitting liability. The settlement also includes $25,000 in PAGA penalties and attorney fees for class counsel.

Paper v. City of Los Angeles: $18M Settlement
January 1, 2026
Brothers Stephen and Richard Paper sued the City of Los Angeles and Officer Jason Stevenson after a harrowing collision in Encino. The plaintiffs alleged Officer Stevenson was driving his patrol vehicle at 80 mph in a 45-mph zone—without emergency lights or sirens—when he T-boned their vehicle as they made a left turn . The impact caused life-threatening injuries, requiring multiple surgeries for both brothers . The city agreed to an $18 million settlement to resolve the negligence claims.

Jury Rules for Insurer in Florida Windstorm Damage Dispute
December 31, 2025
A Miami-Dade County jury delivered a defense verdict in favor of People's Trust Insurance Company on July 29, 2025. Homeowners Jasmine Villaflor and Margarita Hijosa claimed a September 2022 windstorm damaged their residential property at 5920 SW 157th Place, Miami. Their public adjuster estimated repairs at $100,731.52, including full roof replacement and interior repairs to multiple rooms. The insurance company denied the claim, arguing the plaintiffs reported the loss more than one year after it allegedly occurred. People's Trust raised fourteen affirmative defenses, including late notice, wear and tear, and policy exclusions. The jury found the plaintiffs did not prove windstorm damage occurred during the coverage period, ending the case without a damages award.

Campbell v. Monte Carlo: $100M Wrongful Death Verdict
December 31, 2025
In a significant wrongful death verdict, a Miami-Dade County jury unanimously determined that three defendants—Monte Carlo of Miami Condominium Association, Inc., Akam On-Site, Inc., and EMS Protective Group, LLC—were negligent in their security responsibilities, leading to the fatal shooting of Jason Campbell on June 1, 2021. The jury awarded $100 million in damages to Campbell's surviving family members, including his parents and three minor children. The case centered on the defendants' failure to maintain adequate security, implement access controls, and respond to prior criminal threats at the residential property, including a documented incident four months before the shooting in which the same assailant gained unauthorized access. The verdict emphasized the defendants' legal duty to protect residents and invitees from reasonably foreseeable criminal acts and the consequences of failing to do so.
On the Stand with Ashish Arun
A podcast on the law, practice and business of expert witness testimony. Listen to the latest episodes.


















