Your Battle, Our Compass:
Beverly Hills Workplace Sexual Abuse Attorney
Our Beverly Hills attorneys have represented workplace sexual abuse survivors throughout Los Angeles County, holding employers and perpetrators accountable under California law. If you or someone you know has experienced sexual abuse at work, our team is ready to fight for the justice and compensation you deserve — call us today at (213) 320-1001.
What Qualifies as Workplace Sexual Abuse Under California Civil Law
California civil law draws a clear line between sexual harassment and sexual abuse by looking at the nature of the conduct itself. Harassment — unwelcome propositions, offensive comments, a hostile environment — is addressed under FEHA, Gov. Code §12940 et seq. Abuse is physical or criminal conduct: assault, battery, rape, groping, or coerced sexual acts that occur in the course of employment or during a work-related event. That distinction matters because abuse opens three parallel legal pathways simultaneously. First, a civil assault or battery claim under CCP §335.1, with a three-year limitations period. Second, a FEHA claim based on the employer’s failure to prevent a discriminatory and hostile environment — AB 9 (2019) extended that window from one year to three. Third, a direct negligence action against the employer for negligent hiring, retention, or supervision, particularly when the perpetrator is a coworker rather than a direct supervisor. Beverly Hills employees can pursue all three in civil court without waiving the right to file separately with the California Civil Rights Department.
Who Can Be Held Liable for Workplace Sexual Abuse in California?
California law allows workplace sexual abuse survivors to sue multiple defendants — not just the individual who committed the abuse. Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code §12940 et seq.), employers with as few as five employees carry an affirmative legal duty to prevent and correct sexual abuse in the workplace. When that duty is breached, both the abuser and the institution that enabled the conduct can face civil liability — and the employer’s financial exposure is frequently far greater than the individual perpetrator’s. In Beverly Hills civil lawsuits, identifying every responsible party is foundational to full compensation.
Workplace sexual abuse is legally distinct from harassment. Abuse involves physical or criminal sexual conduct — assault, battery, rape, or other unwanted touching of a sexual nature — and triggers claims under Civil Code §1708.5 (sexual battery), Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §335.1 (civil assault and battery), and FEHA simultaneously. This distinction matters because abuse-based claims open the door to vicarious employer liability under the respondeat superior doctrine: when a supervisor uses employer-conferred authority over a subordinate’s job, schedule, and livelihood to facilitate abuse, California courts hold the employer vicariously liable — even without prior knowledge of the specific conduct.
Negligent hiring, retention, and supervision extend that liability to coworker abuse. When an employer knew or should have known of an employee’s dangerous propensities — through prior complaints, background check failures, or ignored warning signs — and kept that person in a position of access to victims, the employer is independently liable under California negligence law. Beverly Hills employees are often surprised to learn how many parties can be named as defendants; the analysis below covers each category.
The Individual Abuser
The person who committed the sexual abuse is always a named defendant. Under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §335.1, a survivor has three years from the date of the abuse to file a civil claim for assault or battery. A parallel criminal case is not required — the burden of proof in civil court is preponderance of the evidence, a substantially lower standard than the criminal threshold of beyond a reasonable doubt. Individual defendants can be held liable for civil assault and battery, sexual battery under Civil Code §1708.5, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and false imprisonment where the victim was physically restrained or blocked from leaving.
Even when an abuser lacks personal assets, naming them preserves the factual record, often increases settlement leverage against the employer, and ensures the jury hears the complete picture of what occurred. In Beverly Hills cases involving high-earning professionals — executives, entertainment industry supervisors, or medical personnel — individual defendants may carry significant personal liability as well.
Employer Liability Under Respondeat Superior
California’s respondeat superior doctrine holds employers vicariously liable for the wrongful acts of employees committed within the scope of employment. In workplace sexual abuse cases, this doctrine applies with particular force to supervisor-on-subordinate abuse. When an employer places a manager in authority over a subordinate — controlling that employee’s hours, evaluations, raises, and continued employment — the employer has granted the tools of coercion. California courts have held that the misuse of that employer-granted power to facilitate sexual abuse falls within the scope of employment for respondeat superior purposes.
“Respondeat superior recognizes that institutional power is the mechanism of the abuse,” according to California employment law practitioners who handle FEHA claims. “A company cannot hand a manager authority over someone’s livelihood and then disclaim responsibility for how that authority gets used.” The doctrine does not require proof the employer authorized or knew of the abuse — vicarious liability is strict once the supervisory relationship and the nexus between authority and abuse are established.
Negligent Hiring, Retention, and Supervision
When the abuser is a peer rather than a supervisor — or when respondeat superior cannot be established on the facts — three independent negligence theories hold employers accountable for their own failures. Each theory focuses on what the employer knew, when it knew it, and what it failed to do.
Negligent hiring applies when an employer failed to conduct adequate pre-employment screening and placed an individual with a documented history of sexual misconduct in a role with access to employees. California courts examine what a reasonable background investigation would have revealed and whether the employer took appropriate precautions before extending an offer.
Negligent retention arises when the employer received complaints, observed behavioral red flags, or was otherwise on notice that an existing employee posed a sexual danger — and continued to employ that person anyway. Under California Labor Code obligations and FEHA’s mandatory investigation requirements, an employer that receives a complaint of sexual abuse must conduct a timely, good-faith investigation. Failure to investigate, substantiate, and act creates direct negligence exposure for every subsequent incident of abuse by that same employee.
Negligent supervision covers the broader failure to establish enforceable anti-abuse policies, train managers on their reporting obligations, or monitor the conduct of employees once warning signs have emerged. Beverly Hills employers in industries with hierarchical power structures — entertainment, hospitality, finance, and healthcare — face heightened scrutiny under this theory where workplace culture normalized or concealed abusive conduct.
Third Parties: Clients, Vendors, Staffing Agencies, and Property Owners
Liability is not confined to the direct employer. California’s joint employer doctrine extends liability to any entity that exercises sufficient control over a victim’s working conditions. Staffing agencies that place workers with client businesses share liability with those clients when the abuse occurs within the placement and both entities exercised control over the worker’s day-to-day environment. This is particularly relevant in Beverly Hills workplaces — entertainment studios, law firms, wealth management offices — where workers are frequently placed through talent agencies, temp services, or contracted staffing providers.
A client business that abuses a vendor’s employee on its premises, or a contractor who employs a supervisor who abuses a subcontractor’s worker, can face direct liability under both FEHA and tort law. Premises liability claims against building owners and property managers are available where the abuse occurred on their property and they had notice of dangerous conditions or inadequate security measures that facilitated the misconduct.
How FEHA Expands Employer Liability Beyond Federal Law
California’s FEHA is broader than federal Title VII in three ways that directly affect who can be sued. First, FEHA covers employers with five or more employees — compared to Title VII’s 15-employee threshold — meaning more Beverly Hills businesses are within reach. Second, FEHA imposes individual liability on supervisors who engage in harassment or abuse, allowing direct claims against managers as well as the employer entity. Third, FEHA’s three-year statute of limitations (extended by AB 9, 2019) runs from the date of the most recent violation, giving survivors more time to file than under federal law and permitting claims arising from patterns of ongoing abuse.
For survivors whose abuse occurred when they were under 18 in a workplace setting, AB 218 (2019) eliminates the statute of limitations under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §340.1. For adult survivors of institutional workplace sexual assault, AB 2777 (2022) created a revival window — open from January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2026 — that allows otherwise time-barred claims to be filed. Survivors who believe their claim may be expired should consult a Beverly Hills sexual abuse attorney immediately; this revival window closes permanently on December 31, 2026.
Parties Who Can Be Held Liable in a Beverly Hills Workplace Sexual Abuse Case
- The individual abuser — personally liable under Civil Code §1708.5 (sexual battery), CCP §335.1 (civil assault and battery), and intentional infliction of emotional distress, regardless of whether criminal charges are filed
- The employer under respondeat superior — vicariously liable for supervisor-on-subordinate abuse when the employer’s grant of supervisory authority was the mechanism that enabled the misconduct
- The employer under negligence theories — independently liable for negligent hiring, negligent retention, or negligent supervision when the employer had notice of the abuser’s dangerous conduct and failed to investigate, discipline, or terminate under FEHA’s mandatory response obligations
- Staffing agencies and joint employers — liable where a placement agency and a client business shared control over the victim’s working conditions under California’s joint employer doctrine
- Third-party clients, contractors, franchisors, and property owners — liable where they exercised control over the victim’s work environment, were on notice of dangerous conditions, or had sufficient operational authority over the location where the abuse occurred
How We Value a Workplace Sexual Abuse Case in California
Having recovered more than $250 million for survivors of sexual abuse and assault across Southern California, Compass Law Group evaluates every workplace sexual abuse case across three categories: economic damages (medical treatment, therapy costs, lost wages, and diminished earning capacity), emotional distress damages, and punitive damages leveled directly against the employer institution. California’s FEHA (Gov. Code §12940 et seq.) covers employers with as few as five employees — a significantly lower threshold than federal Title VII’s fifteen — which means more Beverly Hills workplaces carry civil liability exposure than survivors typically realize.
For survivors abused as minors, AB 218 (2019) eliminates the statute of limitations entirely under CCP §340.1, removing any deadline and any ceiling on recoverable damages. Adult survivors of institutional workplace sexual assault may pursue revived claims under AB 2777 (2022), which opened a revival window through December 31, 2026, reaching cases that expired under prior law and would otherwise be permanently closed.
Punitive damages frequently represent the largest single component of a California workplace sexual abuse verdict. FEHA imposes no statutory cap on punitive damages, and courts assess the employer’s degree of malice, oppression, or fraud — particularly concealment of prior complaints, retention of known abusers, and systematic silencing of survivors — when calibrating the award against institutional defendants with substantial assets.
Economic Damages: Quantifiable Losses California Law Allows You to Recover
Economic damages reimburse every measurable financial loss the abuse caused. In a California workplace sexual abuse civil lawsuit, recoverable economic losses include:
- Past and future medical expenses — emergency care, specialist consultations, psychiatric treatment
- Therapy and counseling costs — long-term trauma treatment is standard in these cases; California courts award projected future therapy costs based on expert testimony about ongoing treatment needs
- Lost wages — income lost while unable to work, during legal proceedings, or after constructive discharge from a position made untenable by the abuse
- Loss of earning capacity — when abuse permanently impairs a survivor’s ability to work in their prior field or at their prior income level, a forensic economic expert calculates the lifetime wage gap as a recoverable item
- Out-of-pocket costs — transportation, medication, and direct expenses tied to treatment or the legal process
California courts permit recovery of future economic losses, not only past expenses already incurred. A survivor who left a six-figure career in Beverly Hills’s financial or entertainment sector following abuse by a supervisor can present economic expert testimony projecting the full value of that career trajectory — and seek the complete difference as damages against the employer.
“Economic damages in workplace sexual abuse cases are consistently undervalued by survivors before they consult an attorney,” says a senior partner at Compass Law Group. “We begin documenting every cost from the first consultation — therapy invoices, employment records, wage history — because that evidence, built early, is what produces the final number at trial or in settlement.”
Emotional Distress Damages: Non-Economic Recovery Under California Law
Non-economic damages compensate for psychological and personal harm that no invoice can capture. California law allows workplace sexual abuse survivors to recover for:
- Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and chronic anxiety
- Depression and suicidal ideation
- Loss of enjoyment of life and disruption of daily activities
- Damage to intimate and professional relationships
- Shame, humiliation, and loss of dignity in the workplace
- Fear and inability to return to any workplace environment
Unlike personal injury claims subject to MICRA’s damages cap, FEHA claims carry no cap on non-economic damages. Civil assault and battery claims under CCP §335.1 are equally uncapped for emotional distress. A survivor pursuing both a FEHA employer liability claim and a civil assault/battery claim against the perpetrator can recover non-economic damages without any statutory ceiling on either count. In documented high-impact cases, emotional distress awards have exceeded economic damages by ratios of three or four to one.
Expert testimony from treating psychologists and psychiatrists establishes the severity and projected duration of psychological harm. Journals, communications, and employment records corroborate the timeline from the date of abuse through trial. California juries in Los Angeles County — which includes Beverly Hills — have historically returned substantial non-economic awards in institutional sexual abuse cases, particularly where the employer’s inaction prolonged the survivor’s exposure.
Punitive Damages: Financial Accountability for the Institution
Punitive damages punish the employer’s wrongful conduct and deter future abuse. In California workplace sexual abuse litigation, punitive damages are assessed against the employer — not only the individual perpetrator — when the employer acted with malice, oppression, or fraud under Civil Code §3294. Courts look for institutional conduct that crosses beyond ordinary negligence:
- A supervisor who committed abuse while exercising the authority the employer delegated to them
- An HR department that buried complaints, discouraged reporting, or pressured survivors not to escalate
- An employer who retained a documented abuser after prior internal complaints
- An institution that used severance NDAs to conceal a pattern of serial misconduct
- A company that accelerated a survivor’s termination after they reported the abuse
FEHA provides no statutory cap on punitive damages, and California courts have affirmed eight-figure punitive awards in cases where institutional concealment was systematic and deliberate. The defendant’s net worth is placed in evidence — a large corporation, luxury hotel, entertainment firm, or financial institution operating in Beverly Hills faces punitive exposure calibrated to its actual financial position. This is a primary reason institutional defendants in these cases pursue early settlement negotiations.
“When the documentary evidence shows an employer knew about the abuser and kept them employed, juries in this county respond to that in a way that is quantifiable,” says a trial attorney at Compass Law Group. “The punitive component is often what transforms a case from a settlement nuisance into a transformative financial reckoning for the company.”
AB 218 and AB 2777: California’s Extended Recovery Windows
Two California statutes dramatically expand both who can file a workplace sexual abuse civil lawsuit and how far back claims can reach.
AB 218 (2019) amended CCP §340.1 to eliminate the statute of limitations for survivors who were under 18 at the time of the abuse. Under AB 218:
- There is no filing deadline — survivors may bring claims at any age
- Claims for institutional negligence — negligent hiring, retention, and supervision — are recoverable alongside perpetrator claims
- Treble damages (three times the actual damages) are available against defendants who concealed the abuse
- Prior settlements entered into by minors may, under certain circumstances, be challenged as inadequate
AB 2777 (2022) applies to adult survivors of sexual assault in institutional settings, including workplaces. It opened a revival window from January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2026. During this window, adult survivors with time-barred institutional workplace assault claims may file in civil court regardless of when the abuse occurred. After December 31, 2026, this window closes permanently. Survivors with potential claims under AB 2777 should not delay — the closing deadline is fixed and will not be extended by subsequent legislation without an act of the California Legislature.
How Employer Liability Theory Shapes Total Case Value
The theory of employer liability is the single largest variable in the total damages calculation. Two frameworks drive institutional exposure in California:
Respondeat superior holds employers vicariously liable when a supervisor commits sexual abuse while exercising the authority the employer delegated. When a manager uses their positional power — scheduling control, performance review authority, access to private spaces — to isolate, coerce, or assault a subordinate, the employer bears direct liability without any requirement to prove the employer had advance knowledge.
Negligent hiring, retention, and supervision governs coworker-on-employee abuse cases. The inquiry focuses on what the employer knew or should have known: prior HR complaints about the same employee, documented misconduct in a personnel file, red flags visible during background screening, or industry-wide knowledge about the individual. Under California Labor Code, employers carry an affirmative obligation to investigate and respond to reports of workplace sexual misconduct — failure to investigate is itself evidence of negligence.
A FEHA claim and a civil assault/battery claim under CCP §335.1 may proceed simultaneously, presenting two independent legal frameworks and two independent bases for damages to the jury.
NDAs and Arbitration Clauses: What California Now Prohibits
Many workplace sexual abuse survivors assume that a confidentiality agreement or mandatory arbitration clause in their employment contract eliminates their right to a civil lawsuit. California law has substantially dismantled that assumption.
Under SB 331 (2021), California prohibits employers from conditioning employment, promotions, or settlement payments on an employee’s agreement to keep workplace sexual assault confidential. NDAs structured to silence survivors are void and unenforceable against them.
Under the federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (2022), pre-dispute arbitration agreements cannot compel employees to arbitrate sexual assault or sexual harassment claims. California law reinforces this protection. Survivors retain the right to file in civil court regardless of what their employment contract says about dispute resolution.
If you signed an NDA at hiring, during employment, or at departure, or if your employment agreement contained a mandatory arbitration clause, those provisions do not automatically foreclose a civil lawsuit for workplace sexual abuse. An attorney can evaluate whether the agreement was valid when signed, whether it covers the conduct at issue, and whether it is enforceable under current California and federal law.
What We Evaluate to Build Maximum Case Value
Compass Law Group’s case valuation process examines every element that drives damages in California workplace sexual abuse litigation:
- Prior complaint documentation — internal HR reports, text records, emails, and witness accounts establishing what the employer knew and when
- Employment records — compensation history, performance reviews, promotion trajectory, and termination circumstances establishing the full economic loss picture
- Medical and mental health records — treatment timelines, psychiatric diagnoses, and provider testimony on long-term prognosis and future care needs
- Perpetrator history — evidence of prior incidents involving the same individual that the employer was aware of or failed to investigate
- Institutional response — whether the employer discouraged reporting, retaliated against the survivor, or used legal instruments to suppress disclosure
- Defendant financial profile — large corporations, luxury hospitality companies, financial institutions, and entertainment firms operating in the Beverly Hills area face punitive exposure scaled to their net worth
The combination of uncapped FEHA damages, California’s extended revival windows under AB 218 and AB 2777, no-cap emotional distress recovery, and California’s strict prohibition on NDAs and forced arbitration in abuse cases makes this state one of the most powerful jurisdictions in the country for workplace sexual abuse civil litigation. The legal infrastructure exists to deliver accountability. The critical variable is the quality of evidence assembled and the skill with which the case is presented — which is what the $250 million Compass Law Group has recovered for California survivors is built on.
What to Do If You Are a Survivor of Workplace Sexual Abuse
Workplace sexual abuse — physical or criminal sexual conduct committed against an employee on the job or by someone connected to the job — is not the same as sexual harassment, and the legal path forward is different. California law gives survivors multiple, overlapping avenues for justice: a civil lawsuit under common-law assault and battery claims, a Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) claim under Government Code Section 12940, or both simultaneously. Knowing the right steps from the moment abuse occurs can mean the difference between a full recovery of damages and a case compromised by destroyed evidence or missed deadlines. The six steps below are specific to workplace sexual abuse civil claims in California.
-
Remove Yourself From Immediate Danger and Secure Your Physical Safety — Your first obligation is to your own safety, not to the employer’s interests or the abuser’s comfort. If the abuse is ongoing or you fear retaliation, remove yourself from the situation, leave the premises if you need to, and contact law enforcement if the conduct constitutes a crime — which physical sexual assault does.
A parallel criminal report does not foreclose your civil lawsuit; in fact, a police report, protective order, or criminal conviction creates a powerful evidentiary record that supports your civil case. You are not required to cooperate with a criminal investigation to pursue civil damages, and you do not need a criminal conviction to win a civil lawsuit. The burden of proof in a civil case is preponderance of the evidence — more likely than not — not the higher “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard. If you need immediate support, the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault (CALCASA) operates a statewide crisis line available around the clock.
-
Write Down Every Detail While Your Memory Is Fresh — Within 24 to 48 hours of the incident — or right now, if you have not yet done so — write a detailed, private account of what happened. Record the date, time, and exact location; a precise description of the conduct; the full name and title of the person who abused you; the names of anyone who witnessed any part of the incident or its aftermath; and anything the abuser said before, during, or after the assault.
This contemporaneous record is admissible evidence and carries significant weight because it was created before any litigation pressure could distort your recollection. Note your own physical and emotional condition immediately after the incident, and document any physical injuries with photographs. If you sought medical care, preserve every record — emergency room paperwork, physician notes, and any follow-up treatment. Medical documentation supports both your damages claim and the factual narrative of the assault. If your employer has an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) with counseling services, you may access those, but be aware that records created within an employer-sponsored program may not carry the same privilege protections as records with a private therapist retained independently.
-
Preserve All Digital and Physical Evidence Before It Disappears — Evidence in workplace sexual abuse cases disappears fast — sometimes within days. Employers have broad authority over company systems, and electronic records can be deleted, overwritten, or archived beyond your reach once you are placed on leave or terminated.
Immediately secure copies of every relevant communication: text messages, emails, direct messages on Slack or Teams, voicemails, and any photographs or videos. Forward workplace emails to a personal, non-company account. Screenshot text threads and save them to a personal device and a secure cloud account. Preserve any physical evidence — torn clothing, objects involved in the incident — and store them somewhere your employer cannot access. If there is security camera footage that may have captured the abuse or your immediate reaction afterward, note the camera locations and the approximate timeframe, and flag this to your attorney immediately; surveillance footage is routinely overwritten on 30- or 60-day cycles. Preserving this evidence now prevents your employer from arguing later that no record of the incident exists.
-
Understand Your Internal Reporting Options — But Do Not Let HR Control Your Legal Strategy — California’s Labor Code imposes mandatory investigation and response obligations on employers when sexual abuse or harassment is reported. Reporting to HR creates a paper trail and triggers your employer’s legal duty to act. If your employer fails to investigate, retaliates against you for reporting, or conceals the abuser’s prior misconduct, that failure becomes direct evidence of negligent supervision and can support punitive damages against the company.
However, internal reporting is not a prerequisite to filing a civil lawsuit, and the manner in which you report — or whether you report at all — should be discussed with an attorney first. HR departments represent the employer’s interests, not yours. Statements you make in a company investigation can be used against you, and signing company documents before consulting counsel can inadvertently waive rights. Pay particular attention to any agreement your employer asks you to sign after reporting: under Assembly Bill 3270 and Senate Bill 331, California law severely restricts employers from using nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) or confidentiality clauses to silence survivors of sexual assault. Any NDA presented to you after an abuse incident may be unenforceable — and signing one without legal review could complicate your civil recovery.
-
Contact a Beverly Hills Workplace Sexual Abuse Attorney Before Filing Any Government Complaint — You have the right to file a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department (CRD, formerly the DFEH) and to pursue a civil lawsuit simultaneously — these are separate, parallel processes. But the sequence in which you take these steps, and the claims you assert in each filing, have strategic consequences that are difficult to undo.
Under FEHA, you have a three-year window from the date of the violation to file a complaint with the CRD, a deadline extended from one year to three years by Assembly Bill 9 in 2019. Your civil lawsuit for assault and battery under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 335.1 carries a separate three-year statute of limitations. An attorney can evaluate which claims to assert under which frameworks — FEHA covers employers with as few as five employees and provides broader damages than federal Title VII — and can advise whether filing a CRD complaint first strengthens or complicates your litigation posture. Your attorney can also identify whether your employer faces vicarious liability under respondeat superior for a supervisor’s abuse, or liability for negligent hiring, negligent retention, or negligent supervision if the abuser was a coworker with a known history of misconduct. Damages available in a successful case include lost wages, diminished future earning capacity, the full cost of therapy and ongoing psychological treatment, and punitive damages against the employer for malice, oppression, or fraud.
-
Act Now If You May Fall Under the AB 2777 Revival Window — It Closes December 31, 2026 — If you are an adult survivor of workplace sexual assault that occurred at an institution — including a corporate employer, a school, a religious organization, or another entity — Assembly Bill 2777 (2022) created a limited revival window running from January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2026. During this window, claims that would otherwise be time-barred may be revived and filed in court.
This is one of the most significant legislative opportunities for workplace sexual abuse survivors in California history, and it is closing. If your assault occurred years or even decades ago, do not assume your window has closed without speaking to an attorney — AB 2777 was specifically designed to reach older claims. Separately, if the abuse occurred when you were under 18 years old — whether you were a minor employee, an intern, or a youth participant in a workplace program — Assembly Bill 218 eliminates the statute of limitations entirely for childhood sexual assault claims under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 340.1. There is no deadline to file. Whether your potential claim is time-sensitive or not, the safest course is to consult with counsel immediately rather than guess at whether your deadline has passed.
If you or someone you love has experienced workplace sexual abuse in California, the attorneys at our Beverly Hills office are available to review your case confidentially and at no cost — call (213) 320-1001 today to speak directly with a lawyer who handles California workplace sexual abuse civil claims.
Do I have a case?
Contact us today for a free consultation.
California's
Gold Standard
Injury Law Firm
With Joseph Shirazi and Simon Esfandi at the helm, our firm is a trusted name in accident law in California.
Meet Our Managing Partners
National Top 100 Trial Lawyers and Avvo 10.0 Superb. Loyola Law School graduate. Recognized for his $14,500,000 truck accident verdict and a $13,000,000 trial verdict.
Read Full Bio →
Super Lawyers Rising Star. Southwestern Law School graduate. Led the firm’s $9,870,000 motorcycle accident settlement and a $2,250,000 rideshare recovery.
Read Full Bio →- ★ National Top 100 Trial Lawyers
- ★ Super Lawyers Rising Star
- ★ Avvo 10.0 Superb Rating
- ★ Top 40 Under 40
- ★ Consumer Attorneys of California · CAALA · AAJ
Countless Real Client Reviews Verified by Google
Jerry
After 10 accidents and 9 attorneys, the client met Simon, who stood out for his honesty and clear communication. Years later, after another accident, the client called Simon and was impressed by his professionalism and follow-through. Simon explained everything, connected him with top doctors, and kept every promise. It was the first time the client felt truly supported—highly recommending Simon and Joseph for their integrity and dedication.
Jacob
Jacob was rear-ended by a big rig and left nearly paralyzed for a year. He found Cooper Law Group, and Joseph and Simon personally helped him through the legal process. Over two years, they ensured he got the medical care and surgeries he needed, helped repair his car, and secured the compensation he deserved. He highly recommends them for truly fighting for their clients.
Blandine
During the early days of COVID, Blandine was hit by a car while biking to work. Alone and unsure of what to do, they found Compass Law Group. Joseph was the first to respond with care and clarity. Throughout the case, the team—Joseph, Simon, and Julie—provided support, regular check-ins, and made the client feel safe and cared for. They now consider the firm like family and highly recommend them for their compassion and competence.
Understanding Your Rights:
Frequently Asked
Questions
#1 Do I have a case?
Understanding whether a claim exists is one of the challenges of personal injury law. This is why we offer free initial consultations to help you make this determination and allow you an avenue to vindicate your rights.
We’re committed to fighting for the rights of accident victims throughout Southern California, and, unlike other California personal injury attorneys, we will take on any case if we can help, no matter how big or small.
#2 What is personal injury?
Personal injury involves harm to an individual’s body or property caused by someone else’s negligence. It can range from minor to significant injuries, often requiring legal action to recover damages. We specialize in representing and securing fair settlements for such victims.
#3 Why hire Compass Law Group?
Our client-focused approach ensures personalized attention, detailed case building, and compelling evidence presentation. We’re skilled in negotiating settlements and prepared for trial with aggressive strategies. Our firm maintains transparent communication, involves clients in the process, and utilizes a wide network of expert witnesses and resources to strengthen cases. Choosing us means trusting a team dedicated to your success and justice.
#4What if I didn't go to the hospital?
No matter the injury size, you have rights that need defending. Many injuries seem minor at first but can worsen over time. Ignoring treatment or legal advice risks your health and compensation. Seek immediate medical and legal help after any accident to ensure proper diagnosis and strengthen your compensation claim.