Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, 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 case and its proceedings.)
SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, ALTERNATIVELY, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION, MUST BE GRANTED AS A MATTER OF LAW WHEN THERE ARE NO TRIABLE ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT
The procedural standard for summary judgment is described by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 437c. The pertinent sections provide:
(a) Any party may move for summary judgment in any action or proceeding if it is contended that the action has no merit or that there is no defense thereto.
(b) The motion shall be supported by affidavits, declaration, admissions, answers to interrogatories, depositions, or in any manner which judicial notice shall or may be taken. The supporting papers shall include a separate statement letting forth plainly and concisely all material facts which the moving party contends are undisputed.
(c) The motion for summary judgment shall be granted if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
(d) Supporting and opposing affidavits or declarations shall be made by any person on personal knowledge, shall set forth admissible evidence, and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated is the affidavits at declarations.California Code of Civil Procedure section 437c. (See also section 437(f) for the similar standards set forth for a motion for summary adjudication.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
When the evidence submitted raises no triable issues, the court has no discretion to deny a summary judgment or summary adjudication Summary judgment or summary adjudication is mandatory in a proper case based upon the law and where the documents disclose no triable issues. See Krasley v. Superior Court. (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 425.
A motion for summary judgment is an exclusive pretrial procedure which allows the court to consider evidence outside the pleadings and for purposes of summary judgment, the material facts are those which have been raised in the pleadings. Kenniston v. American National Insurance Company. (1973) 31 Cal.App.3d 803. The attached declaration of William. Lee. M.D., eliminates any controversy regarding Plaintiffs’ contentions as to the care and treatment rendered by Stefan Black. M.D., to Plaintiff, Donna Hill. Dr. Lee establishes that Stefan Black, M.D., neither violated the standard of care nor caused Plaintiff’s any injury. Thus, there are no triable issues of material fact and Stefan Black. M.D., is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, ALTERNATIVELY, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION, IS PROPER SINCE THIS MOVING DEFENDANT ACTED WITHIN THE APPLICABLESTANDARD OF CARE
In examining the necessity of expert testimony in a medical malpractice action, the Supreme Court in Landeros v. Flood, (1976)17 Cal.3d 399. 410, reiterated the well established rule that
The standard of care which the acts of a physician are to be measured is a matter peculiarly within the knowledge of experts; and presents a basic issue in a malpractice action that can only be proved by their testimony, unless the conduct required by the particular circumstances is within the common knowledge of the layman. Id. at 410. (See Part 4 of 5.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.