Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death/elder abuse case and its proceedings.)
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser, U.C. Davis Medical Center, Mercy, or Sutter.
PLAINTIFF’S TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS IS PROPERLY PLED AND SUPPORTED BY FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant ODA (a) intentionally committed fraud upon Cindy Lee in an effort to obtain her consent to harvest Ruben’s organs, and that (b) ODA did so knowing that Ruben was not an appropriate candidate for organ donation, and that (c) ODA and its employees intentionally bartered, abused and attempted to kill Robert Lee illegally in violation of all legal and ethical standards, including disconnecting him from life support without consent, and injecting him with lethal doses of drugs in an effort to hasten his death.
Defendant states that Plaintiff has failed to show any extreme or outrageous conduct on the part of Defendants
Defendant’s argument lacks merit. According to Defendant, intentional fraud, devious failure to inform Cindy Lee of her son’s prognosis and unsuitability for organ donation, illegal and intentional disconnection from life support and injection with lethal doses of drugs is not extreme and outrageous.
Plaintiff specifically alleges that ODA did these things, and that they directly lied to her in a fraudulent effort to gain her consent. Clearly, the conduct was directed at Plaintiff, as well as her deceased son Ruben.
Although Plaintiff respectfully submits that it is not necessary, should the court sustain demurrer, Plaintiff requests the ability to file an amended pleading. Plaintiff is able to include additional numerous additional and new facts. Leave to file an amended complaint should be liberally granted, especially where Plaintiff can allege new facts. (See McDonald v. Superior Court (1986) 180 Cal.App.3d 297, 303-304 (in order to sustain without leave to amend, it must be shown that the complaint is incapable of amendment, it is an abuse of discretion to deny leave to amend a complaint following demurrer).) (See Part 11 of 11.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.