Criminal Law

• DUI/DWI
• Wrongful Death
  Pedestrians are completely vulnerable and therefore suffer a vastly disproportionate amount of severe injuries and wrongful death when an accident involving a motor vehicle occurs. Approximately 4,280 pedestrians were killed (13% of all traffic fatalities), and 70,000 pedestrians suffered injuries, in U.S. traffic accidents in 2010, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Pedestrian accidents raise unique issues, and may involve pedestrians or joggers who are struck in a crosswalk, sideswiped by a motor vehicle, struck while in a parking lot, struck while exiting a bus or car, or otherwise injured or killed by a driver who is at fault. All too often, drivers are inattentive to the presence of pedestrians and don’t sufficiently look in the direction their car is traveling.
• Traffic Violations
  The legal doctrine of Comparative Fault refers to shared responsibility for an accident or incident. For example, if both vehicles involved in a collision were speeding and driving recklessly at the time of the accident, they may have both contributed to collision. In this instance an apportionment will be determined or proposed allocating a percentage of responsibility for each driver and the amount of the value of the claim will be reduced by the amount of the comparative fault. For illustrative purposes, if a party is 50% at fault, a $10,000 valued claim will be reduced to $5,000.00, or 50% of the original value.
• Hit and Run
  Uninsured Motorist coverage or “UM” coverage applies if the the victim carries the coverage (UM coverage is not mandatory in California), and it is established that either the insured was a victim of a hit-and-run where the perpetrator was not identified or where it is established that the the at-fault drive failed to carry liability insurance for that vehicle.  Uninsured motorist claims are governed by separate and distinct laws, differing from claims against another drivers insurance in several significant ways. These consumer protection provisions specifically require one’s own insurance carrier to use “good faith and fair dealing” during the investigation and resolution of the claim. Other significant differences exist with respect to one’s duty to cooperate with the carrier, statue of limitations periods, notification requirements, health insurance reimbursement, workers compensation and medical payments applications to recovery.

Employment Law

• Workers Compensation
  Yes. You may file an auto insurance claim (referred to as a third party claim) concurrently with workers compensation claim if you were working at the time of the accident and the other party involved was not your employer or an agent or employee of your employer. You may also opt to file only a third party liability claim or just a worker's compensation claim. It should be noted that third party claims law allows for pain and suffering damages (a substantial portion of the claim) where worker's compensation does not.

Property Law

• Property Damage
  In the event that the vehicle is damaged, the at-fault driver is legally responsible to either fix the damage or pay for the fair market value of the vehicle if the vehicle is damaged, whichever is less (see below). The driver’s insurance carrier is responsible for the cost of repair up to the liability policy limits of their auto liability policy. In California, this limit is a mere $5,000.00. The owner of the damaged vehicle is not required to resolve their property damage claim for that amount in the event it exceeds $5,000, however practical considerations should always be taken into consideration when making this determination, such as financial insolvency or indecency of the at-fault driver, other available coverages, etc.  Under the California Automobile Repair Bill of Rights, the victim has the right to take their vehicle to the auto body repair shop of their choice, and the insurance carrier may not mandate a particular repair facility. Our office can act as lies on with the carriers, recommend body shops and review settlement proposals from the insurance carrier, all at no charge whatsoever.

Health Law

• Personal Injury
  A long time resident of Sacramento, Wayne Fosse was admitted to practice law in all California State courts in 1998 after graduating from Lincoln Law School of Sacramento, followed by admission to U.S. Federal Court, Eastern District of California in 2001. After several years of practice as an associate with a Sacramento area based personal injury firm, Wayne started the Law Offices of Wayne Fosse.  With office locations in Sacramento and Placer Counties, Wayne represents clients in all Northern California venues, with extensive litigation experience in Sacramento, Yolo, Placer, Solano, Napa, Alameda, San Francisco, Contra Costa, Sonoma, Tulare, Kern and San Joaquin County Courts. Wayne is a member of the American Bar Association, the Sacramento County Bar Association, Capitol City Trial Lawyers Association and is of course admitted to The California State Bar.
• Auto Accidents
• Dog Bites
  Under California law, several different laws exist to protect the public from dog bites and/or attacks by aggressive animals. The most common basis for responsibility arises when an owner of a dog is responsible for injuries suffered by anyone who is bitten in a public place or lawfully on private property, regardless of whether the owner of the dog knew of the dog’s aggressive nature or dangerous prior behavior.