1. Free Legal Help, Legal Forms and Lawyers. TheLaw.com has been providing free legal assistance online since 1995. Our most popular destinations for legal help are below. It only takes a minute to join our legal community!

    Dismiss Notice

Assaulted by Chevron Employees

Discussion in 'Civil Court, Procedure & Litigation' started by savagenoob, Sep 8, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. savagenoob

    savagenoob Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Jurisdiction:
    California
    There were two assaults back to back, the first one I fought off, the second one I sustained head and hand injuries. I had 4 rods put in my hand. What causes of action can I sue the Chevron for? I need specifics as I am planning on pursuing this in pro per, and if I could pursue the local sheriff department for not giving me medical attention and harassing me even after viewing the video. Thank you for any information
     
  2. Tax Counsel

    Tax Counsel Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,111
    Likes Received:
    1,258
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Not knowing the details of the incidents there is no way I can tell you what causes of action you'd have against the company. But let's start with an important first step. Are you sure these were employees of Chevron itself? If they were workers at a Chevron gas station, for example, they might not be Chevron employees. Many Chevron gas branded gas stations are franchises, which means the station is not owned by Chevron but rather by someone else. The employees of the station would therefor not be employees of Chevron but rather of the franchisee that owns and operates the station.

    The details of what happened in these incidents matter, too. For example, I'm guessing that they didn't just suddenly attack you out of the blue for no reason. Something happened that lead into the fights that occurred.


    Litigants who pursue lawsuits like this pro se often don't do very well because they lack the knowledge and experience to go up against lawyers who have a lot of experience with this sort of thing. So I'd strongly recommend you consult a few personal injury lawyers to see whether you have a good claim to pursue and what you might expect to get out of it and hire the lawyer you like best out of the ones you talk to.

    It's not the responsibility of the Sheriff to provide you medical attention. That's the job of medical personnel like paramedics/EMTs. Without more details, I'm not seeing any good claim here against the Sheriff's office.
     
  3. zddoodah

    zddoodah Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,379
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Colloquially, folks use the terms assault and battery interchangeably (and sometimes as a single term). Under California criminal law, they are two different things. They also mean different things in terms of civil tort lawsuits. In a nutshell, battery is an intentional, harmful or offensive touching, while assault is an intentional act that gives rise to a reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive touching.

    With that in mind, and before I answer your question, I'd like a bit more information. First, have the two individuals been prosecuted for the crime(s) they allegedly committed against you? Second, when did these alleged criminal acts occur? Third, what makes you think these individuals' employer ought to be liable for what they allegedly did?

    Why do you think it is the job of a sheriff's department to give you medical attention? Sheriffs and their deputies are not medical providers. In what way did the sheriff's department harass you? Finally, what video are you talking about?
     
  4. adjusterjack

    adjusterjack Super Moderator

    Messages:
    10,172
    Likes Received:
    3,614
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Intentional tort, negligence, to name just a couple of possibilities.

    It might not be Chevron that you sue. I think a lot of their stations are privately owned franchises. You'll have to find out who the owner is from the Secty of State's business records.

    You won't get "specifics" here. Read the Terms of Service at the bottom of the page.

    Their attorneys will steamroll you and you'll likely end up with nothing. Consult a personal injury attorney. If you have a good case you don't pay anything unless he wins you some money.

    No. Law enforcement has a certain amount of immunity and your comment, sans details, does not appear to raise any liability on their part.
     
  5. mightymoose

    mightymoose Moderator

    Messages:
    11,481
    Likes Received:
    2,027
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Don't.
    If you have a legitimate claim a personal injury attorney will likely work with you for little or no cost up front.
    You will get buried in corporate legalese if you go it alone.
     
  6. savagenoob

    savagenoob Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Maybe I should have been more specific, this is what I was looking for. I have already evaluated my options at this point and have experience with this. I also understand that this location may be a franchise. I also should have been more clear on what I meant by specifics, what was listed above is what I was referring to. This was a long and complicated situation so wanted to save you guys some time. Since a couple of you asked 'what makes you think the Sheriff needs to provide medical attention?', this confuses me. If you are in need of urgent medical attention, you called 911, they show up and leave you bleeding and injured (with a concussion) there is no course of action against this department? If not, I would be surprised. Just cause of action possibilities helps alot, the law library gets overwhelming when you dont know where to start. Thank you all.
     
  7. adjusterjack

    adjusterjack Super Moderator

    Messages:
    10,172
    Likes Received:
    3,614
    Trophy Points:
    113

    That's right. If you got medical attention later that day then the delay probably didn't make and difference in your medical condition. And if the sheriffs arrived without medical assistance after you called 911, there was nothing stopping you from calling 911 again, explaining your condition and requesting medical assistance. I know you don't like that answer but that's the reality of how damages are determined even if you could get past the immunity barrier.
     
  8. army judge

    army judge Super Moderator

    Messages:
    34,615
    Likes Received:
    5,860
    Trophy Points:
    113


    Hmm, why did TWO different people attack you back to back?

    You failed to provide sufficient details for me to opine as to WHOM you might sue.


    Did either attacker somehow manage to place rods into your hand?



    I agree, you do need to be more specific.


    Just guessing here, but perhaps the sheriff's deputies THINK you were the aggressor.

    Why not make an appointment with the High Sheriff or the Under Sheriff to discuss your grievances?

    You could also consider lodging a formal complaint with the Sheriff's department, to pursue that angle, you'll need to meet with an internal affairs investigator.

    You can also speak with your elected county representative.
     
  9. savagenoob

    savagenoob Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    No I really appreciate the information, I don't want to go down a rabbit hole against a government agency with no recourse. Again, thank you for the couple of causes of action you listed. My post is simple, even as a hypothetical, IF I am attacked by employees at a place of business, and it was initiated by them, which resulted in bodily harm, what causes of action can hypothetically be pursued. Instead of specifics and assumptions, keep it simple. I can then look up examples of those causes and determine for myself if it matches my specific circumstance.
     
  10. Zigner

    Zigner Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,538
    Likes Received:
    2,524
    Trophy Points:
    113

    As to your question about law enforcement providing medical attention: Law enforcement is not (generally) trained in anything beyond first aid. Had they attempted to give you "medical attention", they may actually open themselves up to liability. At the very least, even if they are protected from liability, they could have made things worse for you.

    Let me ask you this also: When did this occur?
     
  11. zddoodah

    zddoodah Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,379
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    113

    "Intentional tort" is not a cause of action. It is a category of legal claims.

    If all you want is a list of causes of action that are not tethered in any way to any actual facts, we could do that, but it would be beyond a pointless exercise.

    Yeah...probably not. I certainly would wonder why, in response to a 911 call saying that "you are in need of urgent medical attention," a sheriff's deputy would respond. However, since you seem unwilling to provide any factual information, we're only left to wonder.

    Indeed. That's why smart folks with valid claims hire lawyers.

    I'll try this one more time and start with this: there are some general rules applicable to the vague and hypothetical situation you have described. First, if Bob commits a tort against Susan (e.g., assault and/or battery), then Bob is generally liable for his own conduct. Second, in general, no other person is liable for Bob's conduct. Third, an employer generally has no liability for intentional torts committed by its employees. That's why I asked what makes you think the employer ought to be liable for what its employees allegedly did. Facts matter, and you need to provide them if you want useful responses.
     
    justblue likes this.
  12. savagenoob

    savagenoob Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Hm, very insightful. In the same way of thinking, "smart folks" apparently unlike myself wouldn't use a self help law forum then. You basically just called every person on this site stupid. You assume to know me, my intelligence, or my specific situation. Why not just rename the site, "Hire a Lawyer Unless You Are Dumb".

    So when I asked for specifics, I got "You won't get "specifics" here. Read the Terms of Service at the bottom of the page.", yet, to get vague potential causes of action for my situation you need very specific information from me.
     
  13. Zigner

    Zigner Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,538
    Likes Received:
    2,524
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I guess you can throw a tantrum if you'd like...
    But it won't help.
     
    shadowbunny likes this.
  14. adjusterjack

    adjusterjack Super Moderator

    Messages:
    10,172
    Likes Received:
    3,614
    Trophy Points:
    113

    No, I'm not going down the rabbit hole with hypotheticals. Waste of time.

    If you don't want to reveal your "specific circumstance" then you'd best hire a lawyer and reveal it to him.
     
  15. mightymoose

    mightymoose Moderator

    Messages:
    11,481
    Likes Received:
    2,027
    Trophy Points:
    113

    You have not provided sufficient details to get the answers you are seeking.
    Regardless, pursuing this on your own will not likely produce the results you seek.
     
  16. Zigner

    Zigner Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,538
    Likes Received:
    2,524
    Trophy Points:
    113

    When did the incident occur?
     
  17. justblue

    justblue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,633
    Likes Received:
    1,203
    Trophy Points:
    113

    You asked a vague question and want specific answers without providing more detailed information...not gonna happen.
     
  18. zddoodah

    zddoodah Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,379
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    113

    That's one of the sillier things I've read in a while. Way to focus on one isolated comment and completely misconstrue it.

    Look...I could sit here and create half a dozen factual scenarios and say, "if those are the facts, then you could sue for X, Y and Z," but that would be a waste of my time. That's how most law school exams work. The professor gives an incomplete hypothetical, and the students then address what legal claims might exist, including based on certain assumptions. Here, you haven't even given an incomplete hypothetical.
     
    justblue likes this.
  19. Zigner

    Zigner Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,538
    Likes Received:
    2,524
    Trophy Points:
    113

    The OP direct messaged me. The incident occurred on January 6th, so, unless the OP filed a claim by some time in July, that rules out any action against the police (not that there was any to begin with).

    As to the rest, it sounds to me as if the OP caused a ruckus in a convenience store, then refused to leave when directed to by security. Security proceeded to do what they do, which was remove the unwelcome trespasser from the building.
     
    shadowbunny and justblue like this.
  20. zddoodah

    zddoodah Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,379
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Then there is almost certainly no viable cause of action against the oil company mentioned.
     
    justblue likes this.

Share This Page

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.