Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this medical malpractice case and its proceedings.)
Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendant Universal Hospitals’ Motion for Summary Adjudication
INTRODUCTION
Defendant Universal Hospitals, Inc., (“Universal”), brings this motion for summary adjudication of the First Cause of Action in Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint for negligence. It asserts three grounds: that Decedent David Hall, Jr.’s statutory heirs lack standing, that there was no negligence, and that Universal’s conduct was not a cause of Decedent’s death. The motion includes a voluminous recitation of certain medical records taken virtually verbatim from the recitation of the records in its expert’s declaration, none of which are material facts for summary judgment purposes. Tellingly, the motion ignores entirely the facts upon which liability is sought: the conduct of Universal’s Chief Executive Officer in initially refusing to transfer Decedent to another hospital where he could receive proper care for his life-threatening condition, and subsequently authorizing the hospital staff to lie about Decedent’s condition in order to get him transferred. This is the conduct that is the focus of the declaration Plaintiffs submit of their expert in opposition to the motion.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
As shown below, triable issues of material fact exist mandating a denial of the motion. (See Part 2 of 5.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.