Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this wrongful death case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Sutter, or any skilled nursing facility.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury case and its proceedings.)
Plaintiff Has Failed to Produce Substantial Evidence of Authorization or Ratification by the Defendants’ Offices, Directors or Managing Agents
Reckless neglect on the part of the defendant cannot be inferred and the plaintiff has failed to produce any evidence, let alone substantial evidence to a clear and convincing standard, of reckless neglect. Plaintiffs’ failure to produce substantial evidence of reckless neglect by the defendants’ employees is, alone, enough for this court to grant this motion for directed verdict as to the elder abuse cause of action. However, the Elder Abuse Act, in cases such as this, where a plaintiff is seeking enhanced remedies against an employer for elder abuse, must satisfy additional standards as set forth in Civil Code §3294(b); Welfare & Institutions Code §15657(c), 15667.5(b)(2).
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
Allegations of malice, oppression, fraud or recklessness against an employer must rest on the malice, oppression, fraud or reckless of an employee, because legal entities, such as these defendants “do not have minds capable of recklessness, wickedness, or intent to injure or deceive.” Cruz v Home Base (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 160, 167. Plaintiff must show that an officer, director or managing agent of the defendants (1) had advanced knowledge of the unfitness of the specific employee who committed the alleged neglect against Ms. Hill and employed that person with a conscious disregard of the rights and safety of others, or (2) authorized or ratified, a specific employee’s wrongful conduct, or (3) was personally involved in the neglect and personally guilty of oppression, fraud or malice. CACI 3105; Welfare & Institutions Code §15657; Civil Code 3294(b); College Hospital, Inc. v Superior Court (1994) 8 Cal.4th 704, 723.
In this case, plaintiffs have presented absolutely no evidence that an officer, director or managing agent of any of the defendants engaged in wrongful conduct other than exaggeration and hyperbole regarding putting profits first . Accordingly, plaintiffs’ claims under the Elder Abuse Act must fail and defendants request this court enter directed verdict as to the elder abuse cause of action. (See Part 8 of 8.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.