Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical negligence 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.)
To recover for NIED as a bystander witness, a plaintiff must be present at the scene of the injury-producing event at the time it occurs and is then aware that it is causing injury to the victim. (Thing v. LaChusa, supra, 48 Cal.3d at pp. 667-668.) In Bird v. Saenz, supra, 28 Cal.4th at pp. 920-921, the Supreme Court reiterated the Thing requirement that the plaintiff be present at the scene of the injury-producing event at the time it occurs, and contemporaneously be aware that it was causing injury to the victim. In Bird, the plaintiffs were in the waiting room while their mother was negligently operated on, with the result the Bird plaintiffs “had no sensory perception whatsoever of the [injury-producing event] at the time it occurred.” (28 Cal.4th at p. 917.) The Bird court observed that the contemporaneous awareness element requires a contemporaneous awareness that a close relative is being injured. (28 Cal.4th at p. 916.) The Supreme Court explained, “a rule permitting bystanders to sue for NIED on account of unperceived medical errors hidden in a course of treatment cannot be reconciled with Thing’s requirement that the plaintiff be aware of the connection between the injury-producing event and the injury.” (28 Cal.4th at p. 921.)
In this case, Gillian Smith is apparently attempting to recover damages for injuries to her family members, including her daughter. However, Universal had no connection with her family members or her daughter.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
There was no family member who was a patient of Universal. Gillian Smith did not have a contemporaneous awareness of any injury producing event. Gillian Smith cannot recover damages for NIED based on an injury suffered by a family member.
CONCLUSION
There is no basis for Gillian Smith’s allegation in paragraph 12 of her complaint in which she seeks damages for allegedly exposing her family, including her daughter to the allegedly contagious disease and for seeking her daughter hospitalized. The court should grant the motion to strike.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.