This law says that everyone must avoid harming someone else's body or belongings and shouldn't violate their rights, even if there's no formal agreement or contract in place.

This law defines sexual battery in California and outlines situations that qualify as such. A person commits sexual battery if they deliberately cause unwanted contact with someone's private parts or use their own private parts to make unwanted contact. It also covers situations where a condom is removed without consent before making contact. Anyone found guilty of this can be sued for damages, and the court may issue orders to stop future misbehavior. Terms like 'intimate part' and 'offensive contact' have specific meanings, and this law is in addition to other legal rights victims may have.

This law says that if an adult in a position of authority, like a teacher or coach, commits sexual battery against a minor, the child's consent isn't a valid defense in court. It clarifies that being in a position of authority means being able to unduly influence the minor, and it lists a wide range of possible authoritative roles. The term "undue influence" refers to its definition in another code.

If someone misuses sperm, eggs, or embryos in a way that breaks certain criminal laws, the affected person can sue for damages. If they win, the person harmed can get either the actual damages they suffered or a minimum of $50,000, whichever is more.

If someone hurts you in a domestic violence situation, you can sue them for damages if you prove they caused your injuries and had a specific relationship with you, like a partner or family member. You can receive different types of compensation, including general, special, and punitive damages. Additionally, the court might award you other forms of help, like attorney fees or an injunction. This law adds to other existing legal protections you have, and there's a specific time limit to file this kind of case.

This law explains when someone can be held responsible for stalking. To prove stalking, three main things must be shown: first, that someone consistently behaved in a way intended to follow, watch, or harass another person; second, that this behavior caused the victim to genuinely fear for their safety or caused them significant emotional distress; and third, that a direct threat was made, or a restraining order was violated. Certain actions, like those done by licensed private investigators or officials doing their jobs, don't count as stalking. If someone is found guilty of stalking, they can be required to pay damages and could face court orders to stop their behavior. This law doesn't impair activities that are protected by the Constitution, like free speech and protest.

This law makes it illegal to physically or constructively invade someone's privacy by capturing images, recordings, or impressions of someone engaged in personal or private activities without their permission. It allows for significant financial penalties, including damages and fines, particularly if the invasion was for commercial purposes. Defenses like no actual capture or sale of images are not accepted. The law exempts lawful activities by law enforcement and doesn't limit other legal rights or remedies. If the captured materials are used or sold by someone aware they were illegally obtained, the person might be held accountable. The penalties collected are divided between the prosecuting agency and arts funding. Violations are subject to severe remedies, including injunctive relief.

This law makes it illegal for anyone, except a parent or guardian with their child, to harm or threaten someone trying to enter or leave a school or health facility. It also includes blocking someone's way in a threatening or physically obstructive way. Victims can sue for damages and legal costs. Government attorneys can also take legal action and impose fines. However, this law doesn't affect the right to free speech or protest, nor does it stop people from taking reasonable actions to ensure safety. The focus is on protecting people at schools and health facilities.

This law allows someone to take legal action if another person shares intimate photos or videos of them without permission, especially if the person expected the material to stay private. However, there are exceptions, such as when the person in the material agreed to its public distribution, when it concerns a public issue, or was captured in a public space without a privacy expectation. If someone is successfully sued under this law, the court can stop further distribution and may award legal costs to the victim. Plaintiffs can use a pseudonym to protect their identities in legal documents, and all parties must keep these identities confidential. The law specifies methods for accessing court records in such cases and ensures that other legal protections, like those for internet service providers, remain unchanged. Lastly, it calls for the development of appropriate court procedures by 2019.

This law is about protecting individuals from having their images used in sexually explicit materials without consent. It defines important terms like what counts as consent, altered depictions, and sexually explicit materials. It gives individuals the right to sue if someone creates or shares these materials without consent. However, there are exceptions when the material is used in lawful reporting, legal proceedings, or if it has political or news value. People found guilty can face financial penalties and pay damages to the affected individual. Lawsuits must be started within three years from when the person learned or should have learned about the violation.

This law allows someone 18 or older to be sued if they knowingly send obscene images electronically that the receiver didn't ask for. Obscene images include any sexual act or exposed genitals and must lack serious value in literature, art, politics, or science. A victim who gets such unsolicited images can claim damages for distress, with an option for statutory damages between $1,500 and $30,000, and possibly punitive damages. They can also recover legal fees and seek other remedies. However, this law doesn't apply to service providers or if a person didn't opt-out of receiving explicit content. Health care providers sending images for medical purposes are also exempt.

This law addresses the act of 'doxing,' which is when someone shares personal information about another person online without their consent, intending to cause fear or harm. If you become a victim of doxing, you can sue the person responsible and potentially receive various types of compensation, such as damages for emotional distress and punitive damages. Courts can also issue orders to stop the doxing and allow victims to remain anonymous in legal proceedings by using pseudonyms like 'John Doe.' However, this law does not affect anyone reporting crimes to law enforcement or providing information they believe is true for lawful purposes. Importantly, it does not change the protections online platforms have under federal law.

This law defines deceit as any situation where someone misleads others. It includes pretending something false is true, stating something as true without having reason to believe it, hiding facts when you're supposed to disclose them, or making a promise you don’t intend to keep.

If you're selling or renting a property in California, you don't have to tell the buyer or renter about someone dying there if it happened more than three years ago. You also don't need to share if a previous occupant had HIV or died from AIDS-related causes. However, if the buyer or renter asks directly about these things, you must answer honestly. This law specifically addresses deaths and HIV status, and doesn't change your duty to inform about other physical conditions of the property. The law aims to set a standard for what sellers need to disclose about these specific issues.

If someone tricks a group with the goal of cheating them, the law assumes they meant to cheat each person in that group who is actually fooled.

If you get something from someone else without their permission, or if they change their mind about giving permission, or if you pressured them unfairly to give it to you, you have to give it back. However, there are exceptions: if you have a stronger legal claim to it than they do, or if the deal was illegal for both parties, you might be able to keep it.

This law says that if something was given back or 'restored' because of a mutual mistake, the person who received it doesn’t have to return it until they are made aware of the mistake. But, if there wasn't a mutual mistake, returning the item does not need to be requested.

This law says that people are responsible for injuries caused by their intentional actions or negligence. In terms of firearms, their designers, sellers, and marketers must also exercise ordinary care. It addresses cases involving intoxication by stating that serving alcohol isn't the main cause of injuries—the consumption is. Generally, social hosts can't be sued for injuries from alcohol they serve, but if an adult knowingly serves alcohol to someone under 21 at their home, they can be held liable for resulting injuries. This can lead to claims by the minors or those harmed by them.

This law states that domestic partners have the same rights as spouses to seek compensation if someone negligently causes them emotional distress. It uses the definition of domestic partners from another section of the Family Code.

This law states that if a minor's intentional wrongdoing causes damage, the parents or guardians responsible for the minor are also responsible for paying civil damages. The maximum they can have to pay for each incident is $25,000, plus an additional $25,000 for medical-related costs if someone is injured. This amount is adjusted every two years based on cost of living changes. If the damage involves graffiti or similar offenses, parents or guardians are still liable up to $25,000. Insurance isn't required to cover these damages above $10,000.

This law encourages people to learn CPR and help in emergencies by limiting legal responsibility if they perform CPR in good faith. If you’ve taken a certified CPR course and try to help someone during an emergency, you're protected from being sued for accidents, unless your actions are extremely careless, known as gross negligence. Local agencies and instructors who help people learn CPR also get similar protection from lawsuits for the training they provide. However, this protection doesn’t apply if you’re expecting to be paid for the emergency help you provide.

If a minor under 18 injures someone or damages property by firing a gun, the parent or guardian responsible for the child can be held liable for damages. This applies if they let the minor have the gun or left it where the child could find it. This law can add to any other legal responsibilities, but there's a cap on how much can be charged: $30,000 per injured or deceased person, or $60,000 total for any single incident.

If someone knowingly helps a person who owes child support to avoid paying it, they can be required to pay triple the value of their assistance. However, this amount can't exceed what's owed in child support. The penalty goes directly to the person owed the support, but doesn't reduce the debt itself. If the debt is paid off, this law doesn't apply. Specifically, helping someone hide or transfer their assets counts as helping them avoid payment. Financial institutions aren't liable unless they intentionally help someone avoid payment with actual knowledge of the debt, and they aren't responsible for rogue actions by employees.

This section explains that if you own or maintain a place that's been designated as a shelter or emergency facility (like during an attack or natural disaster), you're generally not responsible for injuries people suffer there, unless you or your staff purposely caused harm. This rule protects property owners and the government from being sued for accidents while helping during emergencies. Also, disaster service workers aren't liable for injuries or property damage during emergencies, as long as they aren't acting willfully harmfully. Finally, the law doesn’t change any pre-existing duties or apply to cases before a certain date.

This law says that if you break a law because you're following orders from a military commander or the Governor during an emergency, you won't automatically be considered negligent or be prosecuted. This applies to actions required for compliance with military or emergency orders, even before this rule was created.

If someone gets hurt while trying to get on a moving train without permission from the railroad or while riding or getting off without permission, they can't sue the railroad for their injuries. The only exception is if the injury was caused by the railroad doing something on purpose that they knew could seriously hurt someone or by being extremely careless about the risk of serious harm.

This law states that health care providers are not responsible for malpractice just because a patient's condition worsens or results naturally from a disease or its reasonable treatment. However, it does make clear that providers can still be held accountable if they failed to inform about treatment risks, made mistakes in diagnosis, or did not treat properly. 'Health care provider' includes licensed individuals and facilities like clinics and health centers.

This law says that if someone harms a police officer, firefighter, or emergency medical worker, they are responsible not only for intentional harm but also for accidents caused by not being careful enough, but only in certain situations. These include knowing the person was there and still being careless, breaking certain laws that lead to harm, intending to cause harm, or setting fires. The law also mentions that if the injured person was partly at fault, their compensation could be reduced. Employers can recover some costs if they paid worker's compensation, but the law doesn't apply to them directly. The law maintains certain older rules about liability exceptions for firefighters.

This law says that if someone wants to sue an attorney for conspiring with their client in a legal dispute, they need to get permission from the court first. This involves convincing the court that they have a good chance of winning the case. If the court agrees, the person can then officially file their lawsuit. Without this approval, the lawsuit isn't valid. However, this requirement doesn't apply if the attorney had a specific duty to the person suing them, or if the attorney's actions went beyond regular legal duties to illegally benefit themselves. If someone files a lawsuit without following these rules, the attorney being accused can use this as a defense, but they have to bring it up right away. Any court orders related to this process can be appealed, meaning they can be reviewed by a higher court.

This law says that public employees or entities, like fire departments, are not responsible for any harm caused by fire protection equipment they donate to volunteer fire departments, unless their actions were extremely careless or intentionally harmful. However, for this protection to apply, the donor must inform the recipient in writing about any known issues with the equipment. Also, the recipient volunteer fire department must inspect and fix the equipment before using it for public safety.

If you use a defibrillator (AED) in an emergency to help someone and you're not getting paid for it, you won't be sued for mistakes as long as you acted in good faith. The same goes for people who train others on using AEDs or CPR. Those who own AEDs aren’t liable for accidents if they've followed the necessary safety rules. However, if someone acts with extreme carelessness or on purpose to harm, these protections don't apply. Also, AED manufacturers or sellers can still be held responsible for any issues with their products.

This law allows healthcare providers to prescribe and issue opioid antagonists, like naloxone, to people at risk of an opioid overdose, or their friends and family who might help them. It also enables these providers to create standing orders, making it easier for these medications to be distributed and administered in emergency situations. People who obtain these medications through these orders should receive training on how to use them. Healthcare providers and individuals administering these medications in good faith are protected from legal trouble, including civil or criminal liability, as long as they act with reasonable care.

This law section ensures that people who help someone suffering from a severe allergic reaction, or anaphylaxis, by using an epinephrine auto-injector, are generally protected from being sued for civil damages. This only applies if they act in good faith and follow specific health and safety guidelines. The law also protects authorized organizations and the physicians who prescribe these devices from legal consequences unless they engage in extremely reckless or intentional harmful behavior. Entities aren't liable if they fail to have or use an epinephrine auto-injector. However, manufacturers and suppliers of the auto-injectors can still be held liable under other laws.

This law explains how entities authorized by the Drug Enforcement Administration can set up bins to collect unwanted medicines from people's homes. These bins are for safe disposal and must meet specific safety and legal requirements. If an entity maintains these bins without receiving extra compensation and follows the rules properly, they won't be held liable for any harm resulting from the bins unless they seriously neglect their responsibilities. They must report to authorities about the bins' status, monitor the bins regularly, and report any issues like tampering. These rules don't force anyone to set up a bin; it's voluntary.

This law says that if you donate food to a nonprofit organization or food bank, you generally won't be held responsible if someone gets sick from eating it, as long as you weren't grossly negligent or intentionally reckless when handling the food. Even if the food has passed its expiration date, you're protected if you reasonably think it's still good to eat. Nonprofits and food banks are also protected from being sued, unless they have been very careless or dishonest in handling the food. The law encourages and protects food donations to help those in need.

This law protects nonprofit organizations and participating medical professionals from being held legally responsible for injuries or damages when offering free vision screenings and temporary eyeglass solutions, as long as certain conditions are met. These conditions include having the screening supervised by a licensed optometrist or ophthalmologist, the patient's waiver acknowledgment, and no replacement for a full eye exam. Liability exclusion doesn't apply if there is gross negligence, a willful act, or misconduct such as violence or hate crimes. Nonprofits must also provide training for safe practice.

This law outlines what should be included in a trauma kit, like tourniquets and bandages, for emergency situations. It encourages bystanders to assist in emergencies using such kits, without fear of legal repercussions under the Good Samaritan Law, as long as they act in good faith without compensation for emergency care. If they're compensated for other reasons, like their regular job, it doesn't count against Good Samaritan protections. It also mentions that people who train others on how to use these kits are protected as long as they do so voluntarily and without pay. Finally, there's no requirement for property managers to use trauma kits during emergencies.

If someone knowingly helps a person who owes child support to avoid paying it, that helper can be forced to pay three times the value of what they provided to help, like hidden assets or unreported wages. This punishment, however, won't go over the total child support amount that’s due. The money collected from this will go to the person supposed to receive child support, but it doesn’t count towards reducing the original unpaid support. The law no longer applies once the full child support is paid.

Examples of illegal help include hiring or paying the person owing support under the table, without reporting them as required to California's employment registry.

This California law requires large retail sellers and manufacturers with over $100 million in annual revenue to publicly disclose their efforts to combat slavery and human trafficking in their supply chains. They must provide this information on their website or, if they don't have one, in writing upon request. The disclosure should cover areas like verification and auditing of suppliers, certification of materials, accountability standards, and employee training. Any issues with compliance can be addressed by the Attorney General through a court order. This law has been effective since January 1, 2012.

This law says that manufacturers or sellers aren't responsible for harms caused by products if the product is known to be inherently unsafe and is a common consumer item like sugar or alcohol. However, it doesn't protect tobacco companies from being sued for tobacco-related injuries or deaths, although it does shield non-tobacco manufacturers, like retailers. In claims about product defects causing harm, this section doesn't affect lawsuits based on manufacturing defects or breach of a specific guarantee. The law also notes it doesn't apply to government actions against tobacco companies to recover costs for treating tobacco-related illnesses. Finally, the Legislature made clear there's no legal shield for tobacco companies in personal injury or wrongful death cases.

If you're a company providing 9-1-1 services, you're generally not responsible for damages or losses unless your actions are extremely careless or done with intent to cause harm. This doesn't cover services under certain pricing arrangements or any claims related to regular consumer devices not tied to 9-1-1 services. Public safety agencies involved in 9-1-1 services are defined by a specific legal act. This rule is about the design, setup, and operation of the specific 9-1-1 service itself.

There are additional responsibilities outlined in other sections of the Civil Code, specifically in Divisions I and II.

This law makes it illegal to send a letter or similar document that looks like a bill to make someone pay for something when it's actually just a sales pitch, unless it follows specific rules. The rules include showing a bold statement saying it's not a bill, and people don't have to pay unless they order what is offered. This notice must be clear and easy to read, and placed right below any amount that looks like it should be paid. If these rules aren't followed, people can claim damages, and the sender can face financial penalties or even be charged with a misdemeanor, potentially facing jail time or a fine.

This law says that if a contract includes a clause about awarding attorney's fees, the party who wins the case related to that contract gets those fees. The court decides who wins, and it could be any party, even if the contract named someone else. Contracts can't have clauses that waive this right to attorney's fees. If a case ends without a final decision or is settled, no one is considered the winner for this purpose. If a defendant offers the full amount claimed and deposits it with the court, they might be considered the winning party. Also, if there's more than just contract issues at stake, any awarded attorney's fees can be adjusted based on who wins or loses on those other issues.

If you're involved in a contract dispute over book accounts made after January 1, 1987, and there's no agreement on attorney’s fees, the party that wins more in the lawsuit can get reasonable attorney’s fees, with limits. If the contract is with a person for personal items, the maximum fee is $960; for other contracts, it's $1,200. But the fee can't exceed 25% of the main debt. If the court finds someone owes nothing, they can also get fees. This only applies if there's a specific written agreement stating this. The rule doesn't apply to lawsuits involving insurance companies or certain financial institutions.

This law defines terms related to farm machinery and repair shops. It mandates that repair shops must keep detailed invoices of all maintenance work and parts used, specifying costs for each job individually. Customers can request a written estimate for labor and parts before any work is done, and shops cannot exceed this estimate without customer consent. If the shop agrees to a total job cost, it can list this on the invoice. Violating these rules is considered a minor criminal offense.

This California law section addresses what happens if someone writes a bad check - a check that can't be cashed because there isn't enough money in the account. The person who wrote the check can be responsible for paying the amount of the check along with a service fee. If the check writer gets a demand notice by certified mail and doesn't pay back the money within 30 days, they might have to pay additional damages that could be triple the original amount but no less than $100 and no more than $1,500. There are exceptions: if the bad check was due to a bank error or a delayed government benefit, or if there was a legitimate disagreement over the transaction (known as a 'good faith dispute'), then the writer might not have to pay these extra fees. The law also specifies how disputes over payment stoppages should be handled in court, including potential actions in small claims court.

If someone owes money (the obligor) and asks in writing about any charges to their account, and the person who is supposed to receive the money (the obligee) doesn't respond in time, the obligee can't charge interest or fees from when they got the question until they reply. A question needs to be sent with certified mail, and the reply must be sent back within 60 days. This rule only applies to retail installment accounts.

If someone intentionally and maliciously destroys property where big improvements are being built, and the court rules in favor of the victim, the court can decide to make the guilty party pay up to three times the actual damage costs. The court can also make the guilty party pay for the victim's reasonable attorney fees.

This law requires retailers with 25 or more employees to agree with consumers on a four-hour time slot for delivering, servicing, or repairing merchandise if the consumer must be present. If the retailer or its agent fails to meet this timeframe, not due to unavoidable events, the consumer can sue for damages up to $600. Similar rules apply to cable companies and utilities regarding service connections or repairs. Consumers can't waive these rights, and any attempts to notify the consumer about delays should include sufficient contact information for rescheduling.

Cable companies and utilities must inform subscribers of their rights to timely service and arrange a new appointment if necessary. In all cases, business records showing timing and attempts to notify consumers are key evidence.

In California, retail stores that don't offer full refunds, store credits, or exchanges for at least seven days after buying a product must clearly display their return policies. This can be done using signs at each register or entrance, tags on the items, or order forms. However, this requirement doesn't apply to items like food, plants, perishable goods, 'as is' purchases, or customized products. If a store breaks this rule, they're responsible for refunding the buyer if goods are returned within 30 days. These rules are additional to other state consumer laws and protections.

This law makes it illegal to sell data, or access to data, obtained through committing a crime. If you are not legally allowed to have the data, you also can't buy or use it if you know, or should know, it came from a crime. However, it respects the rights of whistleblowers and the press. The law allows for legal actions that can lead to penalties like injunctions (court orders to stop doing something). It acknowledges lawful data handling for reasons like protecting people from identity theft. Breaking this law doesn't result in criminal charges but can still lead to legal consequences.

This law outlines what retailers can and cannot do when accepting checks (negotiable instruments) for purchases. Retailers cannot demand a credit card or record its number when a customer pays by check unless for specific situations like ID verification or related to cash back transactions. They can, however, ask for other ID forms. If businesses break these rules, they may face fines, but only if the violation was intentional. Legal actions can be taken by the affected customer or government officials to enforce this law or stop further violations.