Doctor From Sacramento Hospital Causes Horrific Car Accident, Part 2 of 11

(Please 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.)

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this automobile accident case could just as easily involve any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, U.C. Davis Medical Center, Mercy, or Sutter.

Plaintiff also sufficiently alleged facts that established how Dr. Black acted with oppression by subjecting plaintiff to serious physical injuries in knowing disregard of his right to safety. (Id.) Given defendant’s training at Central Hospital, Dr. Black should have avoided driving home on June 16, 2007. For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Plaintiff’s allegations supporting his punitive damages claims are not irrelevant or conclusory. The allegations set forth actual facts regarding Dr. Black’s extensive training on how to acknowledge and avoid the dangerous conduct that gave rise to the present litigation. Facts establishing Dr. Black’s training on fatigue and sleep-deprivation are directly relevant here.

Further, Dr. Black’s decision to drive while impaired is no different than a person driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol with conscious disregard for the safety of others. Punitive damages are routinely pled in motor vehicle accident cases where the defendant was driving under the influence. See, e.g., Peterson v. Superior Ct. (1982) 31 Cal. 3d 147; Taylor v. Superior Ct. (1979) 24 Cal.3d 890, 894. In fact, plaintiff is clearly entitled to plead punitive damages under statutory and common law rights controlling his causes of action. Those include: Civ. Code § 3294; Potter v. Firestone & Rubber Co. (1993) 6 Cal.4th 965, 985; Taylor, 24 Cal.3d at 894.

Dr. Black seeks to strike the following portions of plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint: (a) portions of Paragraph 6, line 15 regarding Defendant’s malicious and oppressive behavior; (b) Paragraph 32 regarding the details of Dr. Black’s training at Central Hospital; (c) Paragraph 42 regarding Dr., Black’s malicious and oppressive conduct; and (d) Plaintiff’s prayer for punitive damages against Dr. Black. Her motion to strike fails on all counts because plaintiff’s allegations are allowed under the negligence theories pled in his First Amended Complaint and he has pled sufficient facts to justify seeking punitive damages. (See Part 3 of 11.)

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Contact Information