It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this birth injury case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)
PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT IS BARRED BY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
Code of Civil Procedure § 340.4 provides in part:
“An action brought by or on behalf of a minor for personal injuries sustained before or in the course of his or her birth must be commenced within six years after the date of birth, and the time the minor is under any disability mentioned in Section 352 shall not be excluded in computing the time limited for the commencement of the action.” Conversely, Code of Civil Procedure § 340.5 indicates that actions against a health care provider by a minor shall be commenced within three years from the date of the alleged wrongful act-except that actions by a minor under the full age of six years shall be commenced within three years or prior to his eighth birthday whichever provides a longer period.
To clarify such statutory inconsistencies, the Supreme Court has held that the general rule is that when a general and particular provision [is] inconsistent, the latter is paramount to the former. Young v. Haines (1986) 41 Cal. 3d 883. The Court in Young, ultimately applied Code of Civil Procedure § 340.5 to Plaintiffs claim for birth injuries. However, the specifically applicable to birth-related injuries statute, Code of Civil Procedure § 340.4, had yet to be enacted. The present case is dissimilar to Young as that case involved potential allegation of intentional concealment of birth-related injuries, whereas, the instant case does not contain any such allegations.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
The Supreme Court provided further guidance in Camarillo, where it held that Code of Civil Procedure § 340.4 would apply to a minor’s claim concerning his birth-related injuries. Camarillo v. Vaage (2003) 105 Cal.App. 4th 552, 557-558. Code of Civil Procedure § 340.4 was again referenced, this time by the California Court of Appeals, in Mossanen, which held that this code section dictated the statute of limitations to apply to birth-related injuries. Mossanen v. Monfared (2000) 77 Cal.App. 4th 1402, 1408-1409. (See Part 6 of 6.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.