You Watched the Verdict. You Heard “Not Guilty.” Now You Are Asking Whether Anyone Will Ever Be Held Accountable.
If a jury in Orange County came back with an acquittal in a sexual assault case, the moment that word was read in court did something to you that no legal ruling can repair. A piece of you that needed the system to see what happened to you, the system said “not proven.” And if you are reading this in the days and weeks after that verdict, the question that does not leave you is the one nobody seems to be able to answer cleanly: is this over, or is there still a door somewhere?
There is still a door. The criminal courtroom is one court. The civil courtroom is a different court, with a different burden of proof, a different standard, a different purpose, and different defendants. The two systems were designed to do different things, and a “not guilty” verdict in the first system does not close the second one. The Hyatt Regency Orange County, the hotel where the assault took place, had its own independent duty to protect you. The perpetrator had his own civil exposure. The insurance company that stands behind both of them has money that can be reached. And the law in California gives survivors more time and more procedural room than most people realize.
This page is what we want every survivor of a Garden Grove, Orange County, or Southern California hotel sexual assault to know about what is still available, how the civil case works, what the evidence clock looks like, and what the path forward actually involves when the criminal system has said “no.”
“What she didn’t expect was to be manhandled like a rag doll.”
— Deputy District Attorney Sarah Rahman, opening statement in the criminal trial of People v. Alyasini (Orange County Superior Court, April 2026).
That was the prosecution’s account of what was done to you in that Hyatt Regency room on August 8, 2020. A jury, after about a day of deliberations, did not return a guilty verdict. That ruling is final as to criminal punishment. It is not a finding that nothing happened. It is not a finding that you consented. It is not a finding that the hotel did its job. It is a finding that the criminal system, working with its specific and very high burden of proof, did not have enough to convict beyond a reasonable doubt. The civil system is a different conversation, and it is the one we are built to have.
The California Civil Case After a Garden Grove Acquittal: The Legal Framework
California gives sexual assault survivors more civil-court leverage than most people realize, and the law has moved in the survivor’s direction in recent years. Several doctrines come together.
The Burden of Proof Is Different, and That Difference Is the Whole Case
In a California civil case arising from sexual assault, the survivor must prove her case by a preponderance of the evidence. That is a low threshold in legal terms but a real one in human terms. It means the survivor’s account, combined with the surrounding circumstances and the supporting evidence, must be found more likely true than not by the civil jury. That is the same standard that decides every car accident case, every premises liability case, every medical malpractice case in California. It is the standard of everyday civil life.
It also means that a criminal acquittal is not even admissible to prove the defendant did not commit the act. California Evidence Code § 130, the so-called “anti-similarity” rule, generally prevents the introduction of the criminal acquittal in a subsequent civil case. The civil jury does not sit in judgment of the criminal jury’s reasoning. The civil jury decides the civil case on the civil evidence.
The Statute of Limitations Is Longer Than Most Survivors Think
California law gives survivors of sexual assault a significantly longer window to file a civil case than the ordinary two-year personal injury deadline. Two statutes work together.
First, the Discovery Rule. Under the standard rule, a personal injury claim accrues when the injury occurs. Under the discovery rule, the claim accrues when the plaintiff first discovers, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the cause of the injury. For sexual assault, the discovery rule is often dispositive: many survivors do not immediately connect what was done to them to a specific wrong they can sue over, particularly when the assault involved alcohol, intoxication, memory loss, or ongoing trauma responses. California courts apply the discovery rule liberally in this context, and the clock does not start ticking until the survivor knows or reasonably should know both that she was injured and that the injury was caused by the assault.
Second, and crucially, Assembly Bill 218 (2019) and Code of Civil Procedure § 340.16 fundamentally rewrote the statute of limitations for sexual assault cases. For childhood sexual assault, the law is now the most generous in the country: claims may be brought until the victim turns 40, or within five years of the date the victim discovers or reasonably should have discovered that the injury was caused by the sexual assault, whichever is later. For adult sexual assault, AB 218 also created a three-year revival window (January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2022) for claims that had previously been time-barred, allowing adult survivors of older assaults a one-time chance to file even after the old statute had run.
For the case we are addressing here, the assault took place on August 8, 2020. The criminal trial concluded in April 2026. The two-year general personal injury statute of limitations (CCP § 335.1) would by default have run from the date of injury, but the discovery rule and the specific provisions of AB 218 and § 340.16 give a sexual assault survivor meaningful additional time. The exact deadline in a given case depends on when the survivor discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, both the injury and its cause. We can work through the dates with you in a free consultation, with no obligation, and tell you honestly whether the window is still open.
California Code of Civil Procedure § 340.16 (added by Assembly Bill 218, effective January 1, 2020): a claim for recovery of damages for childhood sexual assault may be brought “any time before the plaintiff’s 40th birthday” or “within five years of the date the plaintiff discovers or in the exercise of reasonable diligence as a matter of law should have discovered that the injury was caused by the sexual assault, whichever is later.”
California Is a Pure Comparative Negligence State, but It Rarely Matters in a Sexual Battery Case
California follows pure comparative negligence, meaning a plaintiff’s own share of fault reduces but does not bar her recovery. But the doctrine applies to negligence cases, and the perpetrator of an intentional sexual assault is liable for the full harm he caused regardless of the survivor’s conduct. Going willingly to a hotel, drinking, knowing the perpetrator socially, or any other conduct the defense might use to suggest the survivor “contributed” to what happened to her does not reduce the perpetrator’s liability for the assault itself. Where comparative fault does sometimes come into play is in claims against the hotel for negligent security: a jury could be asked to consider whether the survivor’s own conduct contributed to her injuries in deciding the hotel’s percentage of fault. Even there, however, the survivor’s own conduct does not bar recovery. It only adjusts the percentage.
The Civil Claim Itself: California Civil Code § 1708.5 and the Common-Law Battery
California Civil Code § 1708.5 defines civil sexual battery as the intentional touching of an intimate part of another person in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable sense of dignity, when the victim does not consent. The civil claim is distinct from, and in some ways easier to prove than, the criminal sexual offense. The elements are: (1) intentional touching, (2) of an intimate part, (3) in a manner offensive to a reasonable sense of dignity, (4) without consent. The intent required is the intent to make the contact, not a specific intent to harm.
A common-law intentional battery claim is also available, and claims for assault, false imprisonment (if the survivor was held against her will in the room), and intentional infliction of emotional distress may also lie depending on the facts. Each claim has its own elements, but all ride on the same core fact pattern: an intentional, non-consensual act that caused harm.
The Hotel’s Separate Exposure: Negligent Security and Premises Liability
The Hyatt Regency Orange County is not the perpetrator, but it is not off the hook. Hotels in California owe their guests a duty of reasonable care to protect them from foreseeable criminal conduct by third parties, including other guests. The legal theories are several, and they do not require proving the hotel intended any harm.
Negligent security is the most direct theory. A hotel must take reasonable steps to protect its invitees (paying guests) from foreseeable criminal acts. The hotel does not have to guarantee a guest’s safety, but it does have to exercise the level of care a reasonable hotel operator would exercise under the same circumstances. The question is what the Hyatt knew, or should have known, and what it did or did not do about it. The relevant evidence includes: prior incidents at the property, prior calls for service to the Garden Grove Police Department at that address, the hotel’s actual security staffing on the night in question, whether the keys were properly issued and tracked, the condition of the room and its locks, the training of the staff, and whether the hotel had procedures for handling reports of guest-on-guest misconduct.
Premises liability under California law is closely related. A property owner who holds the premises open to the public is liable for physical harm to invitees caused by a dangerous condition on the property if the owner knew or should have known of the danger and failed to take reasonable steps to address it. A hotel room where an invited guest commits a violent assault is, in the right fact pattern, exactly such a dangerous condition.
Negligent hiring, retention, or supervision of any hotel employee who was involved (whether as the perpetrator or as a person who failed to act) is another theory, though in this case the perpetrator appears to have been a fellow guest rather than a hotel employee.
Causation is the question that must be answered for each theory. The defense will argue the hotel did not cause the assault, the perpetrator alone did. The response is that the law does not require the hotel to be the sole cause. California is a comparative fault state. If the hotel’s inadequate security, prior knowledge, or failure to respond contributed even a small percentage to the harm, the hotel is liable for that percentage. A jury finding that the hotel was 20% at fault and the perpetrator 80% at fault still results in a meaningful recovery from the hotel and, more importantly, from the hotel’s commercial general liability insurance.
The Insurance Adjuster Playbook (and How We Counter Each Move)
The moment a sexual assault claim involves a hotel, the insurance company becomes the real fight. The hotel’s commercial general liability carrier (CGL) is the entity with the money, and the CGL adjuster’s job is to pay as little as possible, or nothing. We have seen the playbook hundreds of times. Here are the plays, and our counters.
Play One: The Sympathetic “Just Checking In” Call
Within days or weeks of the incident being reported, the survivor receives a phone call from someone who introduces themselves as a representative of the hotel or its insurance carrier. The call is warm. The caller is concerned. They want to know how the survivor is doing. They ask open-ended questions. They ask what happened. They ask how the survivor is feeling. They say they want to make sure she is getting the help she needs.
Why it is dangerous: the call is almost always being recorded. The call is being used to lock in the survivor’s account before counsel is involved, before she has had time to reconstruct the night, and before she understands the legal significance of every word she says. The call is often designed to elicit statements the adjuster can later use to suggest the survivor is uncertain, inconsistent, or unable to recall key details. The call is the foundation for a later “recorded statement” defense.
Our counter: we tell the survivor, in writing, not to take that call, and we handle every communication with the insurance carrier through our office. We do not refuse to communicate. We do not refuse to provide information. We simply do it on our schedule, in writing, through counsel. If a recorded statement is ever appropriate, we prepare the survivor for it, and we do not let the adjuster run the show.
Play Two: The Quick Settlement With a Release
The adjuster offers a small check, often a few thousand dollars, “to help with immediate expenses,” with a general release attached. The release is written in dense, lawyered language that broadly waives all claims arising from the incident. The survivor, exhausted and under financial pressure, signs. The case is over.
Why it is dangerous: the release is the entire game. A few thousand dollars for a lifetime of harm is not compensation; it is a payoff designed to close the file. Once the release is signed, the survivor cannot reopen the case even if the full scope of the harm becomes clear months or years later. The PTSD, the medical care, the lost earning capacity, the future therapy, the relationship damage, the loss of enjoyment of life: all of it is gone.
Our counter: we tell the survivor to sign nothing. The first offer is never the only offer, and it is almost never a fair offer. We handle all settlement communications, and we never let a release be signed without our review. If a quick needs-based payment is appropriate (and sometimes it is, particularly during the criminal case when the survivor’s expenses are real), we structure it as a partial payment without a release, and we document the absence of a release in writing.
Play Three: The Independent Medical Examination (“IME”)
Months into the case, the adjuster schedules an “independent medical examination.” The survivor is told she must attend. The doctor is selected and paid by the insurance company. The doctor spends 20 minutes with the survivor, asks pointed questions, performs a brief exam, and writes a report concluding that the survivor’s injuries are minor, pre-existing, or unrelated to the incident.
Why it is dangerous: the IME is the adjuster’s primary tool for shrinking the damages case. The report becomes the defense’s medical evidence. The survivor often does not realize the doctor is not her doctor and is not on her side. The exam is structured to elicit history the doctor can characterize as “inconsistent” or “minimal.”
Our counter: under California Code of Civil Procedure § 2032.220, an IME is the defendant’s right, but it is the defendant’s right, not the insurance carrier’s. The carrier has no right to compel an exam outside the formal discovery process. We ensure that any IME is conducted under a proper stipulation, with our own medical expert present, with full audio or video recording, with a copy of all records the doctor reviewed, and with the right to take the doctor’s deposition. The IME doctor who knows he or she will be deposed under oath writes a different report than the IME doctor who is delivering a one-sided product to the adjuster.
Play Four: The Delay Tactic
Months pass with no offer. The adjuster is “still investigating.” The survivor is frustrated. The statute of limitations question lingers. The survivor’s lawyer begins to feel pressure to settle for whatever is offered.
Why it is dangerous: delay is the adjuster’s friend. The longer the case drags on, the more financial pressure builds on the survivor, the more she questions whether the fight is worth it, and the more leverage the adjuster builds. Delay also lets the adjuster develop the surveillance and social-media investigation described in Play Five.
Our counter: we file the case. California civil cases can be filed and served within weeks of intake, and filing triggers a known set of deadlines that prevent the case from drifting. We set our own discovery calendar and push the case forward, not the adjuster’s. If the adjuster wants to delay, the case moves on its own schedule, not the adjuster’s.
Play Five: The Surveillance and Social-Media Scrape
The adjuster hires a private investigator. The investigator follows the survivor, photographs her, and records her. The investigator scrapes her public social media accounts, looking for anything that contradicts her account of her injuries or her functioning. A single photo of the survivor smiling at a family event becomes, in the adjuster’s framing, evidence that she is “not really” injured.
Why it is dangerous: the surveillance and social-media scrape is designed to make the survivor feel like she is being watched, to make her withdraw, and to produce the kind of cherry-picked “gotcha” content the adjuster can use to impeach her credibility. The framing is fundamentally dishonest: a person who has been sexually assaulted can have a good day. A photograph of a survivor smiling does not mean she is uninjured; it may mean she is doing her best to survive. The law understands this, but a casual juror who sees the photograph without context can be misled.
Our counter: we expect the surveillance and we plan for it. We tell the survivor to live her life, and we tell her to avoid the understandable impulse to delete old social-media content (deletion can be used against her as spoliation). We obtain the surveillance footage ourselves and put it in context before the jury. We prepare the survivor to testify honestly and unflinchingly about the difference between a good day and a healed life.
The First 72 Hours: A Practical Roadmap for a Survivor Considering a Civil Case
If you are reading this and you are within days or weeks of the criminal verdict, or within months of the incident, here is what the practical first 72 hours of a civil case looks like.
Hour 0 to 24: Medical and Mental Health Care First. Before anything else, the survivor’s health and safety are the priority. If she is in active medical or mental health crisis, that comes first, full stop. We can build a civil case from a hospital bed; we cannot build one from a crisis. If she is not in crisis, the most important early step is to begin or resume trauma-informed mental health care. The medical record that begins today is a civil-case exhibit in six months. Therapy records, psychiatric records, medication records, and primary care records are all evidence of the harm, and they are also evidence of the survivor’s effort to heal. Both matter.
Hour 0 to 24: Preserve the Phone and Other Personal Devices. The single most dangerous thing a survivor can do is to reset, replace, or “clean up” her phone. The texts to the boyfriend, the search history, the call logs, the photos, the app data, the location data, the deleted items that can still be recovered: all of it is critical. If the survivor has an old phone she no longer uses, that phone should be preserved too. We arrange forensic imaging through a vendor we trust. The imaging is admissible in court, it does not modify the device, and it captures what the survivor’s memory cannot.
Hour 0 to 24: Do Not Speak With the Hotel or Its Insurer. The first call from the hotel or the insurance carrier will come, and it will come fast. Do not take it. Forward the call to us. We handle every communication. We do not refuse to talk; we talk on our schedule, in our form, with our preparation.
Hour 0 to 24: Do Not Post About the Case. The temptation to vent on social media, to respond to a comment, to share a news article with a reaction, or to post anything about the criminal verdict is enormous. Do not do it. Anything posted is evidence. Anything posted can be used. Anything posted can be taken out of context. The survivor’s social media is a witness, and the defense will read every word.
Hour 24 to 48: The Free Consultation. The survivor calls us. We talk for an hour, sometimes more. We listen. We explain the law. We answer questions. We do not pressure. We explain the fee (33.33% before trial, 40% if the case goes to trial, no fee unless we win). We explain that the survivor will not pay a dollar out of pocket for our work on the case. We explain the realistic range and the realistic risks. We do not promise an outcome. We do promise that we will be in her corner from the first day to the last.
Hour 48 to 72: The Preservation Letters Go Out. If the survivor retains us, we send litigation-hold letters to the Hyatt Regency Orange County, to the Garden Grove Police Department, to the cellular carrier, to any ride-share company that may hold trip data, to the hospital that performed the SANE exam, to any third-party social media platform that may hold the perpetrator’s account data, and to any other third party we identify in the first 48 hours. We do this in writing, we do it by certified mail and email, and we do it fast. Once a preservation demand is in the file, the duty to preserve attaches, and any later destruction of records becomes spoliation, with consequences ranging from adverse-inference jury instructions to separate claims for the destruction itself.
The criminal verdict does not change any of this. It does not close the door. It does not erase the evidence. It does not stop the clock on the statute of limitations in the way the survivor might fear. The civil case begins the day the survivor decides she is ready, and it is built on the same evidence, the same witnesses, the same records, and the same law that would have built it the day after the incident.
Frequently Asked Questions
I just watched a jury find him “not guilty” in Garden Grove. Can I really still file a civil case against him?
Yes. The criminal acquittal does not bar the civil case. California Evidence Code § 130 generally prevents the acquittal from being introduced in the civil case to prove he did not commit the assault, and the civil case is decided on a different, lower burden of proof (preponderance of the evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt). The criminal and civil systems are designed to do different jobs, and a not-guilty verdict in one does not close the other.
What is the statute of limitations for filing a civil sexual assault case in California?
California law gives sexual assault survivors more time than the ordinary two-year personal injury deadline. Under California Code of Civil Procedure § 340.16 (added by Assembly Bill 218 in 2019), a claim for childhood sexual assault may be brought until the victim’s 40th birthday, or within five years of when the victim discovers or reasonably should have discovered the injury was caused by the assault, whichever is later. For adult sexual assault, the discovery rule under California law generally applies, and AB 218 also created a three-year revival window (January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2022) for older adult claims that had been time-barred. The specific deadline in your case depends on the dates and the discovery question, and we can work through it with you in a free consultation.
Can I sue the Hyatt Regency Orange County if the perpetrator was a guest, not a hotel employee?
Yes. Hotels in California owe their paying guests a duty of reasonable care to protect them from foreseeable criminal conduct by third parties, including other guests. If the hotel knew or should have known of a risk of violence at the property and failed to take reasonable steps to address it (inadequate security staffing, failure to respond to prior complaints, failure to monitor hallways, failure to enforce key-card controls, or any other breach of the standard of care), the hotel can be liable for its share of the harm. The hotel does not have to be the sole cause. Under California’s pure comparative negligence system, the hotel is liable for the percentage of harm its negligence contributed to.
The criminal jury didn’t believe me. Why would a civil jury believe me?
We cannot promise a civil jury will believe you. We can tell you that a civil jury evaluates the case on a different standard, with different evidence, and on a different set of questions. A criminal jury must be unanimous beyond a reasonable doubt. A civil jury decides by a preponderance of the evidence, and only a majority is required. A civil jury is presented with the full record, including the hotel’s security records, the key-card logs, the surveillance footage if preserved, the prior incident history, the perpetrator’s prior conduct, the perpetrator’s communications with you, and the medical record documenting the harm. The criminal jury did not have all of that. The civil jury will.
What if I was drinking that night? Will the defense use that against me?
Possibly. The defense will try. California’s pure comparative negligence rule does not bar recovery for a sexual assault survivor who was drinking, but the defense will argue that drinking impaired the survivor’s perception, memory, or consent. Our response is multi-fold: intoxication does not equal consent, intoxication does not equal contributory fault for an intentional assault, and the perpetrator’s conduct is the same regardless of the survivor’s sobriety. Where comparative fault does come into play is in the hotel’s share of liability, and even there, drinking does not bar recovery; it only adjusts percentages.
What evidence do I need to prove my case?
The strongest cases are built on a combination of evidence: the survivor’s own account, contemporaneous communications (texts to the boyfriend, to friends, to the perpetrator), the hotel’s surveillance footage, the electronic key-card logs, the front-desk and housekeeping records, prior incident reports at the hotel, the SANE / forensic exam records if any, the medical and therapy records documenting the harm, and expert testimony from a forensic psychologist or psychiatrist on PTSD. The case can be brought with less than all of these, but the more corroborating evidence that exists and can be preserved, the stronger the case.
What damages can I recover in a civil sexual assault case in California?
Three categories. Economic damages (medical care, therapy, lost wages, lost earning capacity, out-of-pocket costs, future care costs), non-economic damages (pain, suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of consortium), and in some cases punitive damages where the defendant’s conduct shows malice, oppression, or fraud. The realistic range for a case with the facts described here, before full discovery, is in the broad range of $250,000 to $1,250,000, with the upper end reflecting a strong case tried well and the lower end reflecting the criminal acquittal’s effect on the jury.
Will the perpetrator’s insurance pay anything?
Probably not for the intentional act itself. Most homeowner and renter insurance policies contain intentional-act exclusions that bar coverage for the policyholder’s intentional torts, including sexual assault. The perpetrator may have no recoverable insurance for the assault itself. The recoverable insurance in a case like this is typically the Hyatt Regency’s commercial general liability (CGL) policy, which responds to the hotel’s own negligence (negligent security, negligent hiring or supervision of any involved employee, premises liability). This is why the hotel defendant matters: the hotel has the insurance, and the hotel’s breach of its own duty is what the CGL policy responds to.
What is tonic immobility, and does it help my case?
Tonic immobility is an involuntary, brainstem-mediated paralysis that can occur during a sexual assault when the victim perceives that escape is impossible. It is a documented physiological response studied in the trauma literature. The classic “she didn’t fight back” or “she didn’t scream” defense is built on the false premise that a real victim struggles. The medical literature says the opposite: most rape survivors freeze, and the freeze is an involuntary reflex, not consent. In a civil case, expert testimony on tonic immobility can be powerful corroboration that the survivor’s apparent non-resistance was a documented trauma response, not agreement. We retain forensic psychologists who are familiar with the literature and can present it to a jury in language that a juror can understand and apply.
How much will it cost me to hire Attorney911 for a case like this?
We work on contingency. 33.33% of the gross recovery before a case is filed or reaches trial, 40% if the case proceeds to trial. You pay no hourly fees, no upfront retainer, and no out-of-pocket expense for our work on the case. The firm advances the case costs (filing fees, deposition costs, expert fees, forensic imaging, and similar) and recovers those costs from the recovery at the end. If we do not win, you owe us nothing for our time and nothing for the costs we advanced. The free consultation has no obligation, and you can walk away at any time before signing a retainer.
What if I do not remember everything from that night? Will that hurt my case?
Memory gaps are common in sexual assault cases, particularly where alcohol, drugs, or traumatic memory fragmentation is involved. The trauma-memory literature recognizes that survivors often do not have continuous, narrative memory of the assault. Memory gaps do not mean the assault did not happen. They mean the survivor’s brain was protecting her. We work with forensic psychologists who can present this to a jury in a way the jury can understand. The defense will try to use memory gaps against you; we will use the medical literature to neutralize that attack.
How long will a civil case take?
Realistically, one to three years from filing to resolution. The first year is typically discovery; the second year is expert workup and mediation; the third year (if there is one) is trial preparation and trial. The timeline depends on the defense’s willingness to engage in good faith, the court’s docket, and the complexity of the case. We do not control the timeline. We control the quality of the work.
Can I sue even if the criminal case was dismissed before trial, or the perpetrator was never charged?
Yes. The civil case is independent of the criminal case. You do not need a criminal conviction to sue. You do not even need a criminal case at all. Many civil sexual assault cases proceed in the absence of any criminal prosecution, on the civil standard and the civil evidence. The criminal case, when it happens, is one source of evidence (depositions taken in the criminal case, police reports, forensic evidence) but it is not a prerequisite.
What is the difference between the criminal case and the civil case in plain language?
The criminal case is the State of California against the perpetrator. The State had to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt to a unanimous jury, and the State did not get there. The civil case is you, the survivor, against the perpetrator and the hotel. You have to prove your case by a preponderance of the evidence to a civil jury, and only a majority is required. The State sought to punish. You seek to be made whole. The two cases have different rules, different evidence rules, different burdens, different objectives, and different outcomes.
I am afraid of going through this again. Is there any way to avoid the trauma of a civil trial?
We understand. Most sexual assault survivors feel exactly that way. The honest answer is that most civil cases resolve before trial, through mediation, and we prepare the survivor carefully for every stage of the process. The survivor does not have to testify at depositions or trial if she does not want to, although in most cases her testimony is the most powerful evidence she has and her lawyers will discuss the trade-offs with her. The mediation process is confidential, and the survivor’s voice is heard without the formality of a courtroom. If the case does go to trial, we prepare the survivor for every step, we control the pace, we make sure she is never alone in the courtroom, and we make sure her dignity is protected throughout. The survivor’s lawyers and her own support system are in the room with her. She is not alone in this.
What is the very first thing I should do if I am considering a civil case?
Call us. The free consultation is confidential, it has no obligation, and it will give you a clear answer on whether the statute of limitations is still open, whether the evidence is preservable, what the realistic range of the case is, and what the path forward looks like. We will not pressure you. We will not promise an outcome. We will tell you the truth about your case and let you decide.
The Closing
A criminal acquittal is a real thing. It happened. It is on the record. It is not going to disappear, and we are not going to pretend it is not there. The criminal jury did not have the full civil case in front of it. The criminal jury did not have the hotel’s security records, the key-card logs, the prior incident history, the medical record, the forensic psychologist, or the lower civil burden of proof. The criminal jury was not asked to do what the civil jury will be asked to do.
The civil case is a different case, in a different court, on a different standard, with different defendants and different damages and a different objective. The civil case is yours. It is the case in which your account is heard in a forum built to listen to it, and in which the hotel is asked to answer for its own conduct, on your terms, under the law California has built to protect you.
The law gives you time. The evidence can be preserved. The insurance is reachable. The path is real. The fight is worth it.
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes.
The consultation is free. The case costs you nothing unless we win. The call is answered by a live person, 24/7.
Call 1-888-ATTY-911.
Hablamos Espanol.