Family Sues Sacramento Doctor For Birth Injuries To Son, Part 1 of 6

The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this birth injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Defendant David Lee, M.D.’s, Notice of Motion and Motion for Summary Judgment, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437c, as to Plaintiff Sean Brown’s Complaint.

This Motion is brought on the grounds that the complaint has no merit as to moving defendant; further, no act or omission to act by Dr. David Lee caused or contributed to any injuries or damages alleged by plaintiff.

In the alternative, Defendant David Lee will move for summary adjudication, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437c, subd. (f), as to the following claim set forth in Plaintiffs Complaint on the following grounds:

Issue Number One: Timeliness of Plaintiff’s Complaint

Plaintiffs Complaint has no merit because Plaintiff fails to establish the elements necessary for a timely medical malpractice claim for personal injuries sustained before or in the course of birth. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 340.4, Plaintiff, born on XX/XX/2001, should have filed his Complaint on or before July 26, 2007, in order to be considered timely. The complaint was not filed until October 22, 2007.

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

This Motion will be based upon this Notice, the Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts filed concurrently herewith, the exhibits attached thereto, and upon such further evidence as may be presented at the hearing of this matter. (See Part 2 of 6.)

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