Emily Straub is Senior Counsel at Tyson & Mendes’ San Diego office. Her practice focuses on defending personal injury, general liability, and professional liability claims. Ms. Straub’s practice is also geared towards representing businesses of all sizes, whether for-profit or not-for-profit, in business disputes and employment litigation.
Ms. Straub has aggressively and successfully defended local and national businesses, attorneys, design professionals, construction contractors, truckers, corporate officers, accountants, and non-profit organizations. Such representation has concerned a wide variety of pre-litigation and litigation matters involving wrongful death, catastrophic personal injury, products liability, premises liability, property damage, breach of contract, professional negligence, wrongful termination, and disability access claims. Ms. Straub has authored a diverse range of successful dispositive and non-dispositive motions in state and federal court, and defeated multiple appeals before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. As a primary handling attorney, Ms. Straub has extensive experience in all aspects of discovery and other pre-trial litigation work, as well as trial preparation.
Ms. Straub earned a J.D. in 2008 from Duquesne University School of Law in Pittsburgh, PA. She earned a B.A. in English in 2002, magna cum laude, from Clark University in Worcester, MA. Ms. Straub is licensed to practice law in all Courts of the State of California; the United States District Court for the Southern, Central, Eastern, and Northern Districts of California; and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. She is a member of the California State Bar, San Diego Defense Lawyers, and Lawyers Club of San Diego.
When she is not working, Ms. Straub likes to spend time with family, friends, and her rescue dog, Oscar. She enjoys hiking, the beach, and live music.
Daily news about the ever-rising statistics on COVID-19 cases and deaths is a constant reminder we are all vulnerable to contracting the coronavirus. While we do not yet have a vaccine to combat this pandemic, telemedicine (a.k.a., “telehealth”) has proven to be a crucial weapon in fighting the spread of COVID-19.
Telemedicine (a.k.a., telehealth) is taking the practice of medicine to a new level. What is telemedicine? By definition, it is “the use of advanced communication technologies, within the context of clinical health, that deliver care across considerable physical distance.” Whether you are talking about videoconferencing, the storing and forwarding transmission of medical data and images, or remote patient monitoring, telemedicine…
Physician burnout has reached epidemic levels with no sign of decline in sight. More than 50% of physicians throughout the country experience burnout symptoms. This percentage is almost two times higher than that in other professions. Currently, the rate of physician burnout is anticipated to continue to increase over time.
Ludwig v. Van Horn, 2019 WL 6720476
Magassouba v. Cascione, Purcigliotti & Galluzzi, P.C., 2019 WL 6749586
Rabinovich v. Maimonides Medical Center, 2019 WL 6519430
Assembly Bill 248, which became Nevada law on July 1, 2019, prevents defendants in civil and administrative actions from requiring certain types of information be kept confidential in a settlement agreement. More specifically, a plaintiff cannot be precluded from disclosing information concerning claims of…
Monster Energy Co. v. Schechter, 2019 WL 3022773
Quigley v. Garden Valley Fire Protection Dist., 2019 WL 3071308
Nodal v. Cal-West Rain, Inc., 2019 WL 3213856
In Barriga Figueroa v. Prieto Mariscal (2019) 441 P.3d 818, the Washington Supreme Court addressed the following question: Is a personal injury protection (“PIP”) application submitted to an insurance company on behalf of a pedestrian injured by the insurance company’s primary insured privileged work product? The answer: Yes.
Hernandez v. City & County of Denver, 2018 WL 5074557
Stella Hernandez sued Deputy Sheriff Tracey Dodson and other Denver Detention Center employees for personal injuries she sustained while incarcerated. In her Complaint, Ms. Hernandez advances allegations of negligence, as well as willful and wanton conduct.
General Standard for Recovery
To prevail on a litigation-based legal malpractice claim, plaintiff must prove the following: (1) the attorney (and/or law firm) owed a duty to use such skill, prudence, and diligence as members of his or her profession commonly possess and exercise under similar circumstances; (2) defendant breached this duty; (3) a proximate causal connection between the breach and the resulting injury; and (4) actual loss or damage resulting from defendant’s negligence. (Mattco Forge, Inc. v. Arthur Young & Co. (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 820, 833.) The elements of a legal malpractice claim, on their face, appear to suggest a plaintiff can recover all damages directly and proximately caused by his/her attorney’s negligence. However, the actual scope of recoverable damages is much more limited, controlled by what is commonly referred to as the “case-within-a-case” standard.
In Rizo v. Yovino, 887 F.3d 453 (9th Cir. 2018), the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit was tasked with answering this question: Can an employer justify paying a woman less than a man due to her prior salary history? Its answer: No.