On 08/30/2019 MIMI LIANG filed a Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice lawsuit against KWAME ADUSEI-POKU DONKOR M D. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is SERENA R. MURILLO. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
Disposed - Dismissed
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Spring Street Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
SERENA R. MURILLO
DONKOR M.D. KWAME ADUSEI-POKU
MEADOWS BRIAN M.
2/26/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Non-Jury Trial;) of 02/26/2021
2/26/2021: Order - Dismissal - Order - Dismissal
2/26/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Non-Jury Trial;)
11/19/2019: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling
11/19/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Demurrer - with Motion to Strike (CCP 430.10))
10/17/2019: Notice of Motion - Notice of Motion
10/17/2019: Demurrer - with Motion to Strike (CCP 430.10) - Demurrer - with Motion to Strike (CCP 430.10)
10/17/2019: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration MEET AND CONFER DECLARATION OF MYRA A. FIRTH, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
8/30/2019: Complaint - Complaint
8/30/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet
8/30/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint
8/30/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case
8/30/2019: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)
8/30/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order
DocketOn the Complaint filed by Mimi Liang on 08/30/2019, entered Order for Dismissal without prejudice as to the entire actionRead MoreRead Less
DocketOrder - Dismissal; Issued and Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order (Non-Jury Trial;)Read MoreRead Less
DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Non-Jury Trial;) of 02/26/2021; Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 02/26/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court on 02/26/2021Read MoreRead Less
DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 09/02/2022 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 02/26/2021Read MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Kwame Adusei-Poku Donkor M.D. (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Demurrer - with Motion to Strike (CCP 430.10))Read MoreRead Less
DocketHearing on Demurrer - with Motion to Strike (CCP 430.10) scheduled for 11/19/2019 at 10:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94 updated: Result Date to 11/19/2019; Result Type to HeldRead MoreRead Less
DocketHearing on Demurrer - with Motion to Strike (CCP 430.10) scheduled for 11/19/2019 at 10:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94Read MoreRead Less
DocketOrder on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Filed by: Clerk; As to: Mimi Liang (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketUpdated -- Request to Waive Court Fees: Filed By: Mimi Liang (Plaintiff); Result: Granted; Result Date: 08/30/2019; As To Parties: removedRead MoreRead Less
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Mimi Liang (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketCase assigned to Hon. Serena R. Murillo in Department 94 Stanley Mosk CourthouseRead MoreRead Less
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 02/26/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94Read MoreRead Less
DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 09/02/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94Read MoreRead Less
DocketRequest to Waive Court Fees; Filed by: Mimi Liang (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: 19STLC07960 Hearing Date: November 19, 2019 Dept: 94
DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT
(CCP § 430.10)
MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT
(CCP §§ 435, 436)
Defendants’ Demurrer is SUSTAINED without leave to amend. Defendants’ Motion to Strike is MOOT.
On August 30, 2019, Plaintiff Mimi Liang (“Plaintiff”) brought this action for general negligence against defendants Kwame Adusei-Poku Donkor, M.D. (“Donkor”) and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. (erroneously sued as Kaiser Permanente, Baldwin Park) (jointly “Defendants”). In response, Defendants filed a Demurrer and Motion to Strike the Complaint on October 17, 2019. No opposition or reply papers were filed.
II. Legal Standard
“The primary function of a pleading is to give the other party notice so that it may prepare its case [citation], and a defect in a pleading that otherwise properly notifies a party cannot be said to affect substantial rights.” (Harris v. City of Santa Monica (2013) 56 Cal.4th 203, 240.) The legal standard for a demurrer and a motion to strike is the same. “A demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the factual allegations in a complaint.” (Ivanoff v. Bank of America, N.A. (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 719, 725.) “The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice.” (CCP § 437(a).) The court looks to whether “the complaint alleges facts sufficient to state a cause of action or discloses a complete defense.” (Ivanoff, supra, 9 Cal.App.5th p. 725.) The court “assume[s] the truth of the properly pleaded factual allegations, facts that reasonably can be inferred from those expressly pleaded and matters of which judicial notice has been taken.” (Id.) “The court does not, however, assume the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of law. [Citation.]” (Durell v. Sharp Healthcare (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 1350, 1358.)
Plaintiff alleges she was a patient at Kaiser Permanente’s emergency room on May 26, 2018. (Compl., p. 5.) Plaintiff alleges she had a stomachache and defendant Donkor ordered an IV for Plaintiff. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges defendant Donkor did not inform her of what was in the IV before putting in the IV and did not obtain Plaintiff’s consent. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges she was rushed out of the emergency room afterwards. (Id.)
To establish a cause of action for negligence, the plaintiff must plead and prove: (1) a duty owed, (2) a breach of that duty, (3) causation, and (4) damages. (Johnson v. Prasad (2014) 224 Cal.App.4th 74, 78.)
Defendants contend Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action pursuant to CCP § 430.10(e) and the Complaint, on its face, violates the applicable statute of limitations. (Demmurrer pp. 1-2.)
Statute of Limitations
As an initial matter, the court agrees with Defendants that Plaintiff’s negligence claim is not one of ordinary negligence, but rather professional negligence. “’The test reasonably must be whether the negligence occurred within the scope of the “skill, prudence, and diligence commonly exercised by practitioners of his profession.”…’ (Bellamy v. Appellate Dept. (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 797, 801.) More so, Plaintiff’s cause of action falls underneath the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) which defined professional negligence as “a negligent act or omission to act by a health care provider in the rendering of professional services, which act or omission is the proximate cause of a personal injury or wrongful death, provided that such services are within the scope of services for which the provider is licensed and which are not within any restriction imposed by the licensing agency or licensed hospital.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.5(2).) Plaintiff alleges Defendants negligently treated her when she was a patient in the emergency room, falling within CCP § 340.5(2)’s definition of professional negligence.
As a cause of action for professional negligence, Plaintiff’s cause of action must be commenced “three years after the date of injury or one year after the plaintiff discovers, or through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury, whichever occurs first.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.5.) Plaintiff alleges she was a patient on May 26, 2018. (Compl., p 5.) Plaintiff alleges she “got shocked then,” when the nurse told her after the IV she would need to be picked up as she might be dizzy. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges “maybe Kaiser stuff [sic] knew I shouldn’t be there so Nurse told me to discharged [sic] as soon as IV was done. Rushing me out so quickly. [sic]. Very dis-satisfying [sic] for E.R. on that day.” (Id.) “The limitations period begins when the plaintiff’s suspicions are aroused. The period is not affected by the plaintiff’s diligence in finding facts to support his lawsuit.” (Knowles v. Sup. Ct. (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 1290, 1300.) Plaintiff alleges she was suspicious or at least had reason to be suspicious of the alleged negligence on the same day she received treatment, May 26, 2018. As such, the statute of limitations on Plaintiff’s cause of action began running on May 26, 2018, and ended one year later on May 26, 2019. Plaintiff filed this instant lawsuit on August 30, 2019, thus Plaintiff’s cause of action is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The court declines to address Defendants’ other argument as to the sufficiency of the pleadings in light of this ruling.
Based on the foregoing, Defendants’ demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED without leave to amend.
Motion to Strike
Based on the court’s ruling above, Defendants’ motion to strike is MOOT.
IV. Conclusion & Order
In light of the foregoing, the Demurrer is SUSTAINED without leave to amend and Motion to Strike is MOOT.
Moving parties are ordered to give notice.
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCdept94@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.