This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 08/09/2020 at 07:50:24 (UTC).

ALLISON STEIN VS DAVID GHOZLAND ET AL

Case Summary

On 11/17/2017 ALLISON STEIN filed a Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice lawsuit against DAVID GHOZLAND. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is NANCY L. NEWMAN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****3817

  • Filing Date:

    11/17/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

NANCY L. NEWMAN

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

STEIN ALLISON

Defendants and Respondents

DAVID GHOZLAND MD INC

GHOZLAND DAVID

DOES 1 TO 25

GHOZLAND M.D. DAVID

DAVID GHOZLAND M.D. INC.

GHOZLAND DAVID; M.D.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

BARRETT JOE ESQ.

BARRETT JOSEPH M.

Defendant Attorneys

MCMILLAN WILLIAM NEAL

OZERAN DAVID J.

TOMLINSON JANET M.

LA FOLLETTE JOHNSON DEHAAS FESLER & AMES

WEND CHRISTOPHER P.

LA FOLLETTE JOHNSON DE HAAS FESLER ETC

 

Court Documents

Motion re: - MOTION RE: MOTION TO ADVANCE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING DATE

10/15/2019: Motion re: - MOTION RE: MOTION TO ADVANCE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING DATE

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (DEFENDANTS DAVID GHOZLAND, M.D. AND DAVID GHOZLAND, M.D., INC...)

11/12/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (DEFENDANTS DAVID GHOZLAND, M.D. AND DAVID GHOZLAND, M.D., INC...)

Declaration - DECLARATION OF EMILY SIKKING

12/27/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF EMILY SIKKING

Motion for Summary Judgment

12/27/2019: Motion for Summary Judgment

Separate Statement

2/26/2020: Separate Statement

Case Management Statement

2/28/2020: Case Management Statement

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; CASE MANAGEMENT CONFE...)

3/11/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; CASE MANAGEMENT CONFE...)

Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC, AND ALL RELATED DATES

8/6/2020: Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC, AND ALL RELATED DATES

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO TRANSFER TO WEST JUDICIAL DISTRICT (SANTA MONICA)

2/9/2018: ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO TRANSFER TO WEST JUDICIAL DISTRICT (SANTA MONICA)

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

2/22/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

NOTICE OF TRANSFER

4/30/2018: NOTICE OF TRANSFER

Case Management Statement -

7/27/2018: Case Management Statement -

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees -

9/12/2018: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees -

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees -

9/13/2018: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees -

Case Management Statement - Case Management Statement 12-11-18 8:30 am Dept P

11/28/2018: Case Management Statement - Case Management Statement 12-11-18 8:30 am Dept P

Other - - Other - Stipulation and Order Striking Claim for Punitive and Exemplary Damages from Second Amended Complaint;

12/11/2018: Other - - Other - Stipulation and Order Striking Claim for Punitive and Exemplary Damages from Second Amended Complaint;

Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore - Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore Kristin Cyphers CSR#13518

12/11/2018: Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore - Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore Kristin Cyphers CSR#13518

Minute Order - Minute Order (Defendants David Ghozland and David Ghozland M.D., Inc.'s Dem...)

12/11/2018: Minute Order - Minute Order (Defendants David Ghozland and David Ghozland M.D., Inc.'s Dem...)

54 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 07/26/2021
  • Hearing07/26/2021 at 09:00 AM in Department P at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/16/2021
  • Hearing07/16/2021 at 09:00 AM in Department P at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2020
  • DocketStipulation and Order (to Continue Trial, FSC, and All Related Dates); Filed by David; M.D. Ghozland (Defendant); David Ghozland, M.D., Inc. (Defendant); DAVID GHOZLAND (Defendant) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • Docketat 09:00 AM in Department P; Jury Trial (with a 10 days time estimtae) - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/08/2020
  • Docketat 09:00 AM in Department P; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/30/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department P; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/15/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department P; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/27/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by David; M.D. Ghozland (Defendant); David Ghozland, M.D., Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/24/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department P; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (to continue trial date) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/24/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to continue trial date)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
120 More Docket Entries
  • 02/09/2018
  • DocketOrder; Filed by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2018
  • DocketORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO TRANSFER TO WEST JUDICIAL DISTRICT (SANTA MONICA)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/18/2018
  • DocketMotion to Transfer; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/18/2018
  • DocketPLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO TRANSFER TO WEST JUDICIAL DISTRICT (SANTA MONICA)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/11/2017
  • DocketFirst Amended Complaint; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/11/2017
  • DocketFIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR: 1. PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE 2. BATTERY 3. BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY 4. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 5. INTENTIONAL MISREPRENTATION (FRAUD) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/17/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/17/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by ALLISON STEIN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/17/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR: 1. PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE 2. BATTERY 3. BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY 4. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/17/2017
  • DocketComplaint Filed

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC683817    Hearing Date: March 11, 2020    Dept: P

 

Tentative Ruling

Allison Stein v. David Ghozland, et al. Case No. BC683817

Hearing Date: March 11, 2020

Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment/Summary Adjudication

Plaintiff Stein had a labiaplasty surgery performed by defendant David Ghozland, M.D.; plaintiff alleges defendant removed more tissue than was consented to, resulting in trauma, physical pain and incontinence. Defendants move for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication as to the causes of action for fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress and battery.

Evidentiary Objections

All objections to defense expert Emily Sikking, M.D. declaration are OVERRULED.

Summary Judgment

The elements of a cause of action for medical malpractice are (1) the duty to use such skill, prudence, and diligence as other members of the medical profession commonly possess and exercise; (2) breach; (3) causation; and (4) damages. E.g. Hanson v. Grode (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 601, 606. Expert testimony is required to prove breach of the standard of care. Landeros v. Flood (1976) 17 Cal.3d 399.

Defendants argues Ghozland complied with the standard of care when performing surgery, did not mislead plaintiff, did not exceed the scope of consent and did not cause plaintiff’s injuries, supported by the expert declaration of Emily Sikking, M.D. and depositions of plaintiff’s treating doctors. Defendants’ Separate Statement (DSS) at ¶¶22-29. This is sufficient to carry defendants’ initial burden, which thereafter shifts to Stein to show a triable issue of material fact as to standard of care and causation.

Plaintiff presents contrary expert testimony from Marki Knox, M.D., who opines, based on physical examination and review of medical records, that defendant did not meet the standard of care, failed to obtain informed consent and performed surgery that exceeded the scope of Stein’s consent. Plaintiff’s Response to Separate Statement (PRSS) ¶¶22-29. This is sufficient to create a triable issue of material fact as to these elements. Motion for summary judgment DENIED.

Summary Adjudication – Battery

Medical battery occurs when a patient has consented to a particular treatment, but the doctor performs a treatment that goes beyond the consent. Conte v. Girard Orthopaedic Surgeons Medical Group, Inc. (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 1260, 1268.

Dr. Sikking states she saw no evidence of “mutilation” when reviewing plaintiff’s medical records and opines the labiaplasty was within the scope of plaintiff’s consent. Defendants’ Separate Statement 21, 22, 24. Defendants also argue there is no evidence of an intent to harm. An intent to harm is not an element of medical battery. See, Conte. Plaintiff provides contrary evidence from Dr. Knox, who states “[i]t is clear to me that Ms. Stein did not get what she and Dr. Ghozland agreed to. Instead, it appears that Dr. Ghozland disregarded Ms. Stein’s wishes . . . .” Knox Decl. at ¶25. This creates a triable issue of fact as to battery.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

The elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress are (1) extreme and outrageous conduct with the intention of causing, or reckless disregard to the probability of causing, emotional distress; (2) plaintiff’s extreme emotional distress, and (3) causation. Cochran v. Cochran (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 488, 494.

Defendants argues Ghozland’s conduct was not extreme and outrageous (since he performed the surgery correctly), and he did not intend to cause plaintiff emotional distress. As explained above, the Knox declaration provides evidence the surgery exceeded the scope of the consent. This conduct could be considered “extreme and outrageous” by a reasonable jury. Additionally, while plaintiff has not shown Ghozland had the intent to cause emotional distress, she presents evidence that could lead a reasonable jury to conclude, by exceeding the scope of Stein’s consent, Ghozland acted with a “reckless disregard” to the probability of causing distress.

Fraud

The elements of fraud are (1) misrepresentation, (2) knowledge of falsity, (3) intent to defraud, (4) justifiable reliance and (5) damage. Engalla v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc. (1997) 15 Cal.4th 951, 974.

Defendants argue plaintiff cannot establish false representations or knowledge of falsity. Plaintiff’s opposition does not directly address defendant’s arguments regarding the fraud claim. The court interprets this silence as agreement summary adjudication is proper.

Summary judgment DENIED. Summary adjudication GRANTED as to the fraud cause of action only and DENIED as to all other causes of action.