Cal-OSHA Implements Newly-Revised COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (ETS)
Recently, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law AB 35, a bill that significantly amends the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) by restructuring MICRA's limit on attorney fees and raising the cap on a plaintiff’s recovery for noneconomic damages. Under MIRCA, noneconomic damages (i.e. pain, suffering and emotional distress damages) were capped at $350,000. Starting next year, however, medical malpractice suits that do not involve a death will have a new cap of $350,000, with graduated increases over the next 10 years culminating in a $750,000 cap. After the initial 10 years, the bill increases the cap annually by 2% to account for inflation. Cases involving a patient death will start at a cap of $500,000 graduating over 10 years to $1,000,000, with the same annual inflationary adjustment thereafter. The text of the bill can be found here: https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB35/2021
California Superior Court Rules Board Diversity Law Unconstitutional
The statements on this page are for informational purposes only and are not intended to, nor are they, legal advice and should not be relied upon in any individual situation. Each case and situation is different. Consult an attorney about your individual case/situation.
Business owners will recall that on September 30, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law AB 979, which requires all California-based publicly traded companies (and foreign corporations headquartered in California) to have at least one board member from an underrepresented community. The number of diverse directors then increases on a graduated scale in 2022 depending on the size of the corporation’s board. Penalties for noncompliance can result in $100,000 fines for the first violation and $300,000 for each subsequent violation. However, a Los Angeles Superior Court recently found this law to be unconstitutional -- which may likewise have an effect SB 826, a law that similarly requires gender diversity on boards. While cases addressing these laws make their way through the courts, companies are well advised to maintain compliance with these laws – both in the event that an appeals court rules differently and as part of sound ESG practice and policy.
Swisher Law News