Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
The following blog entry is written from a defendant’s position as trial approaches. Reviewing this kind of briefing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death/medical malpractice 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.
INTRODUCTION
This medical malpractice action against Defendant Stuart White, M.D. arises out of his care and treatment of minor plaintiff Amy Brown in and around May 25, 1999, at co-defendant XYZ Hospital. On August 16, 2000, plaintiffs filed their Complaint, and on December 21, 2000, they filed their First Amended Complaint. On November 14, 2002, plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint was amended adding Dr. White as a Doe defendant. On December 5, 2002, Dr. White was served with a Summons on the Amended First Amended Complaint.
On May 25, 1999, Dr. White was called to XYZ Hospital for emergency neonatal care of plaintiff Amy Brown. Neither plaintiff Amy Brown, nor her mother, plaintiff Tina Brown, were the patient of Dr. White, nor had he ever treated either of them before. Further, Dr. White only treated plaintiff Amy Brown at XYZ Hospital on May 25, 1999. In their Complaint, plaintiffs essentially allege that Dr. White failed to timely diagnose and treat plaintiff Amy Brown’s respiratory difficulties, causing her to suffer further hypoxic brain injury.
The declaration of Dr. White will demonstrate that the care and treatment rendered by him to minor plaintiff Amy Brown complied, at all times, with the applicable standard of care. Moreover, the care and treatment provided by Dr. White in no way caused or contributed to plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages. As such, there are no triable issues of material fact in this action.
Further, California’s Good Samaritan Law, California Business & Professions Code § 2395 and § 2396, in essence, provides that a physician shall not be liable for emergency care rendered to a patient at the scene of an emergency. Dr. White cannot be liable for plaintiffs’ damages because he rendered emergency care to plaintiff Amy Brown at the scene of an emergency.
Accordingly, defendant Stuart White, M.D., is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.
(See Part 3 of 9.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.