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 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 medical malpractice/personal injury case and its proceedings.)
Additionally, it is well settled that:
California courts have incorporated the expert evidence requirement into their standard for summary judgment in medical malpractice cases. When a defendant moves for summary judgment and supports his motion with expert declarations that his conduct fell within the community standard of care, he is entitled to summary judgment unless the plaintiff comes forward with conflicting expert evidence. Munro v. Regents of the University of California, supra, 215 Cal.App.3d at pp. 984-985 (quoting Hutchinson v. United States (1988) 838 F.2nd 390.) [Emphasis added.]
Expert Review of the Instant Case Establishes that the Conduct of Dr. Lee Was Within the Community Standard of Care.
The instant case is a medical malpractice action involving allegations which are beyond a layman’s knowledge. Thus, under Landeros and Munro, whether or not the care ar d treatment rendered by Dr. Lee was within the standard of care is a matter exclusively with: In the province of expert testimony. Therefore, Dr. Lee supports his motion with an expert declaration from Robert White, M.D. establishing that the care and treatment rendered by him was within t he standard of care for a vascular surgeon.
As illustrated by his declaration submitted herewith, Dr. White is licensed to practice medicine in California and is board certified in surgery, thoracic surgery and vascular surgery. Thus, Dr. White is qualified to testify as to the standard of care applicable to a vascular surgeon, and compliance or non-compliance therewith by a vascular surgeon.
Based upon his background, training, and expertise in the field of vascular surgery, it is Dr. White’s opinion that the care and treatment rendered to Sean Black by Dr. Lee was within the appropriate standard of care for a vascular surgeon. Thus, there is no evidence to support plaintiffs’ cause of action against Dr. Lee for medical negligence.
Pursuant to Munro, Dr. Lee should be granted summary judgment as he supported his motion with an uncontradicted expert declaration establishing that the care and treatment provided to plaintiff fell within the community standard of care. Plaintiff cannot establish Dr. Lee’s breach of the standard of care. (See Part 8 of 8.)
For more information you are welcome to contact personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.