This case was last updated from Fresno County Superior Courts on 12/22/2019 at 14:49:45 (UTC).

Gabriel Lyles vs. Community Medical Centers

Case Summary

On 06/19/2018 Gabriel Lyles filed a Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice lawsuit against Community Medical Centers. This case was filed in Fresno County Superior Courts, Bf Sisk Courthouse located in Fresno, California. The Judges overseeing this case are Snauffer, Mark, Diaz, Monica, Black, Donald, McGuire, Rosemary, Cabrera, Carlos and Simpson, Alan. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******2204

  • Filing Date:

    06/19/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice

  • Court:

    Fresno County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Bf Sisk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Fresno, California

Judge Details

Judges

Snauffer, Mark

Diaz, Monica

Black, Donald

McGuire, Rosemary

Cabrera, Carlos

Simpson, Alan

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

LYLES, LAURA

LYLES, GABRIEL

Defendants

FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL

COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL

OJI, OJI A., Medical Doctor

FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL, LLC

Community Medical Centers

Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

English, Monrae L.

Defendant Attorneys

Canepa, Mark B.

Ball, Michael F.

 

Court Documents

Notice Filed

Notice of Jury Deposit; Comment: of Jury Deposit

Proof of Service

Proof of Service re: Oji A. Oji; Comment: Oji A Oji, M.D.

Proof of Service

Proof of Service re: FHSH; Comment: Fresno Heart & Surgical Hospital

Answer Filed

Answer/Response/Denial/Demurrer - First Appearance Fee; Comment: Answer/Response/Denial/Demurrer - First Appearance Fee

Notice of Hearing

Notice of Hearing; Comment: Notice of Case Management Conference and Judge Assignment

Summons issued and filed

Summons; Summons issued and filed

Civil Complaint filed

Complaint; Comment: PF Complaint

Civil case cover sheet

Civil Case Cover Sheet; Comment: PF Civil Case Cover Sheet

Summons issued and filed

Summons; Comment: PF Summons

Motion filed

HRG 3/12/19 Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel Plaintiff; Comment: HRG 3/12/19 Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel Plaintiff Gabriel Lyles' Responses to Special Interrogatories (Set 1)

Declaration Filed

HRG 3/12/19 Declaration of Chad K. Casey in Support of Motio; Comment: HRG 3/12/19 Declaration of Chad K. Casey in Support of Motion to Compel Plaintiff Gabriel Lyles' Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set 1)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities

HRG 3/12/19 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support; Comment: HRG 3/12/19 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion to Compel Plaintiff Gabriel Lyles' Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set 1)

Motion filed

HRG 3/12/19 Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel Plaintiff; Comment: HRG 3/12/19 Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel Plaintiff Gabriel Lyles' Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set 1)

Notice Filed

Notice Filed; Comment: Case reassigned to Judge Rosemary T. McGuire

ADR Stipulation Mediation filed

ADR Stipulation; Comment: Parties to engage in mediation. Mediator: to be determined

Minute Order Attachment

Minute Order Attachment

Deposit, payment,disbursment

Notice of Jury Deposit; Comment: Jury Deposit

Answer Filed

Answer to Complaint - First Appearance Fee; Comment: Answer to Complaint

42 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 08/12/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • DispositionDisposition: Judgment- Summary Judgment Entered; Judicial Officer: McGuire, Rosemary; Judgment Type: Summary Judgment Entered; Judgment - Monetary Award; Awarded To:; Oji, Oji A., Medical Doctor; Awarded Against:; Lyles, Gabriel; Lyles, Laura; Comment: Plaintiff shall take nothing

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2020
  • HearingJury Trial- Judicial Officer: Simpson, Alan; Hearing Time: 9:00 AM; Comment: Jury by both; 3-7 Days

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/28/2020
  • HearingTrial Readiness- Judicial Officer: Simpson, Alan; Hearing Time: 9:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/04/2020
  • HearingMandatory Settlement Conference- Hearing Time: 1:30 PM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/12/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • HearingNotice of Entry of Judgment- Notice of Entry of Judgment; Comment: Notice of Entry of Judgment

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/09/2019
  • HearingChambers Work- Pre- Judicial Officer: McGuire, Rosemary; Hearing Time: 5:30 PM; Result: Chambers Work - Order Submitted for Consideration

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/08/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • HearingJudgment Received- PROPOSED Judgment; Comment: Forwarded to Dept. 403

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/08/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • HearingLetter Received- Letter Received; Comment: Letter to Judge McGuire dated 8/8/19

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/02/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • HearingJudgment Received- Judgment; Comment: No Action Taken, Counsel submitting a new Judgment

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/18/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • HearingMinute Order Attachment (Tentative Rulings Only)- Civil Document; Comment: attached certificate of mailing

    Read MoreRead Less
70 More Docket Entries
  • 01/17/2019
  • FinancialFinancial info for Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center: EFile Payment Receipt # WEB-2019-04511 Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center $180.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/17/2019
  • FinancialFinancial info for Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center: Transaction Assessment $180.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/17/2019
  • FinancialFinancial info for Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center: EFile Payment Receipt # WEB-2019-04506 Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center $180.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/17/2019
  • FinancialFinancial info for Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center: Transaction Assessment $180.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/30/2018
  • FinancialFinancial info for Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center: EFile Payment Receipt # ACCT-2018-02672 Community Medical Centers $585.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/30/2018
  • FinancialFinancial info for Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center: Transaction Assessment $585.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/30/2018
  • FinancialFinancial: Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center; Total Financial Assessment $945.00; Total Payments and Credits $945.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/19/2018
  • FinancialFinancial info for Lyles, Gabriel: EFile Payment Receipt # WEB-2018-44698 LYLES, GABRIEL $435.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/19/2018
  • FinancialFinancial info for Lyles, Gabriel: Transaction Assessment $435.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/19/2018
  • FinancialFinancial: Lyles, Gabriel; Total Financial Assessment $435.00; Total Payments and Credits $435.00

    Read MoreRead Less

Complaint Information

MONRAE ENGLISH, Cal. Bar #: 237163 menglish@wctlaw.com

WILD, CARTER & TIPTON

A Professional Corporation

246 West Shaw Avenue

Fresno, CA 93704

Telephone: 559-224-2131

Facsimile: 559-224-8462

JAMES WEST, Cal. Bar #: 282076

james@wsb-law.com JAMES BULGER, Cal. Bar #: 290126

jim@wsb-law.com

WEST SEBER BULGER LLP

9401 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 608 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: 310-651-7438 Facsimile: 310-597-4707

Attorneys for Plaintiffs GABRIEL LYLES and LAURA LYLES

E-FILED

6/19/2018 11:03 AM

FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

By: L Peterson, Deputy

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF FRESNO

GABRIEL LYLES and LAURA LYLES,

Plaintiffs, VS.

COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba

FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL

HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART &

SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART

HOSPITAL, LLC; OJT A. OJI, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 100, Inclusive,

Defendants.

CASE NO: 18CECG02204

PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT FOR

DAMAGES FOR:

2. LOSS OF CONSORTIUM IDAMAGES EXCEED $25,000]

) ) ) ) % ) 1. MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ) ) g

) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

COME NOW Plaintiffs GABRIEL LYLES and LAURA LYLES to complain of

Defendants COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL

HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL,

LLC; OJT A. OJI, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. At all times mentioned in this Complaint, Plaintiffs GABRIEL LY LES and

LAURA LY LES were and are individuals residing in the County of Fresno, State of California.

2. Defendants COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; and FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL, LLC (hereinafter collectively “FHSH Defendants”) were, at all times relevant herein, conducting business in the County of Fresno, State of California.

3. Venue is proper in this Court because the claims arose in Fresno County where Plaintiff was a patient of Defendants.

4, The amount in controversy in this matter ex ceeds the sum of $25,000.00, exclusive of interest, costs, and fees.

PARTIES

. From on or about June 23, 2017, until on or about June 24, 2017, Plaintiff, GABRIEL LY LES was a patient of FHSH Defendants in the City of Fresno, County of Fresno.

6. At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiffs GABRIEL LY LES and LAURA LYLES were and are legally married.

7. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant OJI A. OJI, M.D.physician duly licensed to practice his or her profession and was engaged in the practice of his or her profession in the County of Fresno, State of California

8. At all imes herein mentioned, Defendant COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL was and is: (a) engaged in owning, operating, maintaining, managing and doing business in the State of California; (b) engaged in rendering medical, surgical, clinical, pathological, diagnostic, nursing, skilled nursing, rehabilitation, and other custodial care and services to the general public for compensation; and (c) a corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, joint venture, unincorporated association, or some other business entity doing business in the County of Fresno, State of California, and duly organized and existing

under and by virtue of the laws of the County of Fresno and the State of California.

under and by virtue of the laws of the County of Fresno and the State of California. 9. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL was and is: (a) engaged in owning, operating, maintaining, managing and doing business in the State of California; (b) engaged in rendering medical, surgical, clinical, pathological, diagnostic, nursing, skilled nursing, rehabilitation, and other custodial care and services to the general public for compensation; and (c) a corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, joint venture, unincorporated association, or some other business entity doing business in the County of Fresno, State of California, and duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the County of Fresno and the State of California.

9. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL was and is: (a) engaged in owning, operating, maintaining, managing and doing business in the State of California; (b) engaged in rendering medical, surgical, clinical, pathological, diagnostic, nursing, skilled nursing, rehabilitation, and other custodial care and services to the general public for compensation; and (c) a corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, joint venture, unincorporated association, or some other business entity doing business in the County of Fresno, State of California, and duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the County of Fresno and the State of California.

10. Atall times herein mentioned, Defendant FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL, LLC was and is: (a) engaged in owning, operating, maintaining, managing and doing business in the State of California; (b) engaged in rendering medical, surgical, clinical, pathological, diagnostic, nursing, skilled nursing, rehabilitation, and other custodial care and services to the general public for compensation; and (c) a corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, joint venture, unincorporated association, or some other business entity doing business in the County of Fresno, State of California, and duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the County of Fresno and the State of California.

11. Since the true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, of the Defendants designated and sued as DOES 1-100, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiffs, those Defendants are designated by their fictitious names. Plaintiffs allege on information and belief that each of the Defendants designated and sued as a DOE is legally responsible in some manner for the events and happenings referred to herein below, and legally caused the injury and damages to Plaintiffs as herein alleged. Plaintiffs will ask leave of this Court to amend this pleading to insert the true names and capacities of these Defendants designed by their fictitious names when those facts become known to Plaintiffs.

12. At all imes mentioned herein, Defendants COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL, LLC; OJI A. OJI, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 100,

12. At all imes mentioned herein, Defendants COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL, LLC; OJI A. OJI, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, were physicians, technicians, laboratories facilities or the owners or managers of such facilities engaged in, and/or licensed to operate businesses maintaining and offering laboratory facilities to the public and to the physicians and hospital herein and others involved in the rendition of ancillary services and facilities incidental to the operation of a hospital, clinic or doctor's office and/or the provision of health services to the general public, and, in particular, to Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES herein.

inclusive, were physicians, technicians, laboratories facilities or the owners or managers of such facilities engaged in, and/or licensed to operate businesses maintaining and offering laboratory facilities to the public and to the physicians and hospital herein and others involved in the rendition of ancillary services and facilities incidental to the operation of a hospital, clinic or doctor's office and/or the provision of health services to the general public, and, in particular, to Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES herein.

13. Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true names or capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise, of the Defendants designated and sued herein pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §474 under the fictitious names DOES 1 through 100, inclusive. Plaintiffs allege on information and belief that each of the Defendants designated and sued herein asa DOE is legally responsible in some manner for the events and happenings referred to herein below and legally caused the injuries and damages to Plaintiffs as herein alleged. Plaintiffs will ask leave of this Court to amend this pleading to insert the true names and capacities of these Defendants designated by their fictitious names when those facts become known to Plaintiffs.

14. During said periods herein alleged, Defendants, including DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, agreed to perform and undertook to perform for Plaintiff GABRIEL LYLES all services necessary to his hospital, medical and other ancillary healthcare needs, including medical and non-medical services which included, but were not limited to, observation, attention, examination, evaluation, diagnosis, care and treatment of said Plaintiff, as well as proper administrative and clerical management of Plaintiff's healthcare needs. In so doing, Defendants, and each of them, established a relationship with the Plaintiff herein giving rise to each Defendant's duty to provide skillful management of the healthcare rendered to Plaintiff for his medical, clerical and administrative needs.

15. At all times herein mentioned, the Defendants DOES 1-100, inclusive, were and now are physicians, surgeons, nurses, medical personnel or other health care professionals, duly licensed to practice their profession, or engaged in the practice of their profession, in the Counties of Fresno in the State of California.

16. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants DOES 1-100, inclusive, and each and

16. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants DOES 1-100, inclusive, and each and every DOE in between, were and now are corporations, partnerships, sole proprietorships, joint ventures, unincorporated associations or some other business entities doing business in the State of California and duly organized and existing under, and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, each of which in some way contracted to provide, and/or in some other manner provided, medical care and treatment or ancillary services to the general public, including Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES.

every DOE in between, were and now are corporations, partnerships, sole proprietorships, joint ventures, unincorporated associations or some other business entities doing business in the State of California and duly organized and existing under, and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, each of which in some way contracted to provide, and/or in some other manner provided, medical care and treatment or ancillary services to the general public, including Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES.

17. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants DOES 1-100, inclusive, were administrative and clerical staff engaged to operate the business of offering non-medical services to the general public, including Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES.

18. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants DOES 1-100, inclusive, were Risk- Bearing Organizations (“RBOs”)/Medical Business Organizations ("MBOs"), including but not limited to HMOs, administering or managing the provision of health services, or agents thereof, or middlepersons interfacing between an MBO and the health care providers actually providing care to patients, including Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES.

19. During said periods of time herein alleged, D efendants, and DOES 1-100, inclusive, and each of them, agreed to perform and undertook to perform for Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES all services necessary for his care, including both medical and non-medical services, which included, but were not limited to, observation, attention, examination, evaluation, diagnosis, care and treatment of Plaintiff herein, as well as proper administrative and clerical management of his health care. In so doing, Defendants, and each of them, established a relationship with Plaintiff, giving rise to each Defendant’s duty to provide skillful management of Plaintiff’s health conditions and medical, custodial, clerical and administrative needs.

20. At all relevant times, Defendants, and each of them were the agents, servants, employees, joint venturers, ostensible agents and/or contractors of each of the remaining Defendants, and were, at all times acting within the course and scope of such agency, service, employment, contract, and/or joint venture. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and upon said

basis allege that, at all times herein mentioned, each of the D efendants hired and employed agents,

basis allege that, at all times herein mentioned, each of the D efendants hired and employed agents, servants, staff members, employees, and/or joint venturers. Each Defendant had also given prior approval and subsequent ratification for the conduct, acts, and/or omissions of the other Defendants, and each of them.

servants, staff members, employees, and/or joint venturers. Each Defendant had also given prior approval and subsequent ratification for the conduct, acts, and/or omissions of the other Defendants, and each of them.

21. Atall relevant times, each Defendant operated, managed, maintained, oversaw and controlled the activities of all co-Defendants and DOES 1-100, inclusive, and each of them, so that the conduct, acts, and omissions of each co-Defendant and DOES 1-100, inclusive, and each of them, were the conduct, acts and omissions of each Defendant, and, at all relevant times, said co- defendants were then acting as the actual or ostensible agents of each Defendant and DOES 1-100.

22. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants, and each of them, when acting as a principal, was negligent in the selection and hiring of each and every Co-Defendant as an agent, servant or employee and, furthermore, expressly directed, consented to, approved, atfirmed, and ratified each and every action taken by the co-Defendants.

23. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times relevant herein, each and every one of the Defendants, including the DOE Defendants, acted in concert and in furtherance of each other’s interest. The acts of any individual Defendants, as described herein, were known to and ratified by all Defendants. The acts and conduct of each and every Defendant, as described herein, were intentional and/or harassing and/or were not a normal part of Plaintiff’s employment and were not the result of a legitimate business necessity.

24, Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all relevant times each of the Defendants was the integrated enterprise, joint employer of Plaintiff and was engaged with some or all of the other Defendants in a joint enterprise for profit, and bore such other relationships to some orall of the other Defendants so as to be liable for the conduct of them. Plaintiff performed services for each and every one of Defendants, and to the mutual benefit of all Defendants, and all Defendants shared control of Plaintiff as employers, either directly orindirectly, and of the manner in which Defendants’ business was conducted.

25. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that all Defendants

acted pursuant to and within the scope of the relationships alleged above, that all Defendants knew

acted pursuant to and within the scope of the relationships alleged above, that all Defendants knew or should have known about, authorized, ratified, adopted, approved, controlled, aided and abetted the conduct of all other Defendants; and that all Defendants acted pursuant to a conspiracy and agreement to do the things alleged herein.

or should have known about, authorized, ratified, adopted, approved, controlled, aided and abetted the conduct of all other Defendants; and that all Defendants acted pursuant to a conspiracy and agreement to do the things alleged herein.

26. Plaintiff makes the allegations in this Complaint without any admission that as to any particular allegation. Plaintiff bears the burden of pleading, proof, or persuasion and therefore reserves her right to plead in the alternative.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS COMMONTOALL CAUSES OF ACTION

27. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 26 are realleged and incorporated herein by this reference.

28. Atall times herein mentioned, Defendants COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL, LLC; OJI A. OJI, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, were healthcare providers licensed and/or certified in the state of California to provide medical services.

29. On or around June 23, 2017, Defendants COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL, LLC; OJTA. OJI, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, rendered professional medical services and outpatient hospital services to Plaintiff, GABRIEL LY LES.

30. On or around June 23, 2017, Plaintiff was a patient of FHSH Defendants for an ablation procedure and had been placed under general anesthesia for the procedure. At or around the time Plaintiff was awakening from sedation, Defendants, and each of them, including nursing and medical staff of FHSH Defendants, so negligently, carelessly, and recklessly failed to exercise the proper degree of knowledge, skill, and care in the treatment and care of Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES during his recovery and arousal out of the general anesthesia by failing to adequately physically support Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES and allowing him fall to the floor.

30. On or around June 23, 2017, Plaintiff was a patient of FHSH Defendants for an ablation procedure and had been placed under general anesthesia for the procedure. At or around the time Plaintiff was awakening from sedation, Defendants, and each of them, including nursing and medical staff of FHSH Defendants, so negligently, carelessly, and recklessly failed to exercise the proper degree of knowledge, skill, and care in the treatment and care of Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES during his recovery and arousal out of the general anesthesia by failing to adequately physically support Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES and allowing him fall to the floor. 31. Asaresult of the negligence of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES suffered severe and permanent injuries, including but not limited to facial fractures, a concussion, and other severe and permanent harm.

31. Asaresult of the negligence of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES suffered severe and permanent injuries, including but not limited to facial fractures, a concussion, and other severe and permanent harm.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

32. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 31 are realleged and incorporated herein by this reference.

33. During said periods of time hereinabove alleged, Defendants, and each of them, agreed to perform and undertook to perform for Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES all services necessary to Plaintiff's care, which included, but were not limited to, observation, attention, examinations, evaluations, diagnosis, care and treatment of Plaintiff GABRIEL LYLES. In so doing the Defendants, and each of them, established a relationship with Plaintiff, giving rise to each Defendant’s duty to Plaintiff to provide skillful management of Plaintiff’s health conditions, including but not limited to observation, attention, examinations, diagnosis, care and treatment of Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES.

34. In connection with the diagnosis, care, examination, observation, attention, and other such treatment provided to Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES, the Defendants, and each of them, did represent and warrant that they did possess and would use that degree of medical and/or hospital and/or laboratory and/or radiological skill, care, knowledge and learning which is ordinarily and commonly possessed and/or exercised by medical facilities, clinics, mental wards, hospitals, doctors, physicians, medical specialists and radiological and laboratory technicians, and ordinarily possessed and exercised by other reputable members of the profession in the same or similar locality as the Defendants herein, and each of them.

35. Atall times herein mentioned, Defendant OJI A. OJI, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 100, and each of them, were duly qualified members of the medical staff of FHSH Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and in doing the things herein alleged, were the agents of FHSH Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and availed themselves of the facilities at FHSH Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, and were acting in the course

and scope of their authority as agents with the permission and consent of their Codefendants.

and scope of their authority as agents with the permission and consent of their Codefendants. 36. At all times herein mentioned, FHSH Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, were responsible for the selection, appointment, and reappointment of the medical staff at FHSH Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive.

36. At all times herein mentioned, FHSH Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, were responsible for the selection, appointment, and reappointment of the medical staff at FHSH Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive.

37. At all times herein mentioned, FHSH Defendants and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, had a duty to investigate the competency of physicians and surgeons prior to initial appointment to their medical staff, to perform periodic review of competency before reappointment of physicians and surgeons on the medical staff, to maintain the highest level of medical care for patients in the hospital, to protect patients from harm, and to evaluate the quality of medical treatment rendered on its premises.

38. Defendants named herein and each of them, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, breached their duty to Plaintiff GABRIEL LYLES to provide skillful management of his health conditions, including but not limited to observation, examinations, attention, diagnosis, care and treatment of Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES.

39. Atall times herein mentioned, D efendants named herein, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, so negligently and carelessly cared for, treated and rendered medical services upon the person and body of the plaintiff and so negligently and carelessly operated, managed, controlled and conducted their services, activities and supervision in connection with Plaintiff's care and treatment, and so negligently and carelessly failed to properly ensure the character, quality, ability and competence of individuals treating patients in said hospitals that as a direct and proximate result thereof Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES was caused to and did suffer the injuries herein alleged.

40. During said periods of time herein alleged, Defendants, and each of them, were negligent, careless and unskillful in their management of the health of Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES, including but not limited to the observation, attention, examinations, diagnosis, care and treatment that were or should have been provided to Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES.

41. The negligence of Defendants, and each of them, include but is not limited to the following: (1) negligent failure to diagnose, manage, and treat Plaintiff’s condition; (2) negligent failure to render appropriate and complete treatment of Plaintiff’s condition; (3) medical and administrative abandonment of Plaintiff; (4) negligent failure to have adequate staffing to meet

41. The negligence of Defendants, and each of them, include but is not limited to the following: (1) negligent failure to diagnose, manage, and treat Plaintiff’s condition; (2) negligent failure to render appropriate and complete treatment of Plaintiff’s condition; (3) medical and administrative abandonment of Plaintiff; (4) negligent failure to have adequate staffing to meet reasonably expected medical needs of their patient; (5) negligent failure to properly investigate the competency of physicians and surgeons before reappointing them to the medical staff of the hospital; (6) negligent failure to maintain the highest level of medical care for patients in the hospital; (7) negligent failure to protect patients from harm; (8) negligent failure to evaluate the quality of medical treatment rendered on its premises; (9) negligent failure to supervise those under their control and supervision; (10) negligent failure to appropriately care for and/or monitor patients who underwent sedation; and (11) negligent failure to prevent surgical and/or post- surgical falls.

reasonably expected medical needs of their patient; (5) negligent failure to properly investigate the competency of physicians and surgeons before reappointing them to the medical staff of the hospital; (6) negligent failure to maintain the highest level of medical care for patients in the hospital; (7) negligent failure to protect patients from harm; (8) negligent failure to evaluate the quality of medical treatment rendered on its premises; (9) negligent failure to supervise those under their control and supervision; (10) negligent failure to appropriately care for and/or monitor patients who underwent sedation; and (11) negligent failure to prevent surgical and/or post- surgical falls.

42. Further, during said periods of time, Defendants, and each of them, did negligently and carelessly fail to properly advise, warn or inform Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES of any other possible alternative methods of diagnosis or treatment, or of the possible risks attendant to the methods of diagnosis or treatment utilized, thereby failing to obtain a free and informed consent.

43. Further, during said periods of time, Defendants, and each of them, did negligently select, review and supervise their medical staff.

44, As aproximate result of the negligence of Defendants COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL, LLC; OJTA. OJI, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, and each of them, Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES suffered severe and significant injuries to his person, including, but not limited to re-injuries and further hospitalization and medical services.

45. As aproximate result of the negligence of Defendants COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS, dba FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART & SURGICAL HOSPITAL; FRESNO HEART HOSPITAL, LLC; OJTA. OJI, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, and each of them, Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES has sustained injury to his health, strength, and activity, all of which injuries have caused, and continue to cause Plaintiff GABRIEL LY LES great mental, physical, and nervous pain and suffering. As a result of such injuries, Plaintiff GABRIEL LYLES has sustained general damagesshown according to proof at trial.