This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 12/30/2019 at 06:17:26 (UTC).

BERT WALKER VS LAKEWOOD GARDENS ET AL

Case Summary

On 04/18/2017 BERT WALKER filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against LAKEWOOD GARDENS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are MARC D. GROSS, MASTER CALENDAR, LORI ANN FOURNIER and MARGARET MILLER BERNAL. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****7939

  • Filing Date:

    04/18/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

MARC D. GROSS

MASTER CALENDAR

LORI ANN FOURNIER

MARGARET MILLER BERNAL

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

WALKER BERT

BERT WALKER INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SUCCESOR

BERT WALKER AS SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO ARDELIA WALKER

Defendants and Respondents

MEH HEALTH MANAGEMENT LLC

DOWNEY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER

DOES 1 THROUGH 100

WDW JOINT VENTURE

LAKEWOOD GARDENS

W D W JOINT VENTURE DBA DOWNEY

WDW JOINT VENTURE BUSINESS FORM UNKNOWN

LAKEWOOD GARDENS BUSINESS FORM UNKNOWN;

GARDENS LAKEWOOD

DOWNEY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER BUSINESS

MEH HEALTH MANAGEMENT LLC A LIMITED

MEH HEALTH MANAGEMENT LLC DBA LAKEWOOD GARDENS

WDW JOINT VENTURE DBA DOWNEY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER

5 More Parties Available

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

TAYLOR JOHN C. ESQ.

TAYLOR & RING LLP

TAYLOR & RING

GILBERT BRENDAN PAUL

TAYLOR JOHN CORNELL

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

WROTEN & ASSOCIATES INC.

PAPPAS LOUIS W. ESQ.

PLEISS CASEY SITAR & ROSS

MANNING & KASS ELLROD RAMIREZ TRESTER

PLEISS SITAR MCGRATH HUNTER & HALLACK

PLEISS LARRY THOMAS

PAPPAS LOUIS WILLIAM ESQ.

MCGRATH MARK GRANT

MASHBURN XENA ROCHELLE

RENICK STEVEN JEFF

 

Court Documents

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (RULING ON SUBMITTED MATTER HEARD ON 10/29/2019)

12/10/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (RULING ON SUBMITTED MATTER HEARD ON 10/29/2019)

Opposition - OPPOSITION PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DOWNEY'S EX PARTE APPLICATION

12/11/2019: Opposition - OPPOSITION PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DOWNEY'S EX PARTE APPLICATION

Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE DEFENDANT MEH HEALTH MANAGEMENT, LLC DBA LAKEWOOD GARDENS' MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 13 TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE OF OR REFERENCETOTHEFEESCHARGED BY DEFENDANT LAKEWOOD GARDEN

12/12/2019: Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE DEFENDANT MEH HEALTH MANAGEMENT, LLC DBA LAKEWOOD GARDENS' MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 13 TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE OF OR REFERENCETOTHEFEESCHARGED BY DEFENDANT LAKEWOOD GARDEN

Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE DEFENDANT MEH HEALTH MANAGEMENT, LLC DBA LAKEWOOD GARDENS' MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 1 TO PRECLUDE REFERENCE TO OR EVIDENCE OF OTHER INCIDENTS, COMPLAINTS, CLAIMS OR LAW

12/12/2019: Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE DEFENDANT MEH HEALTH MANAGEMENT, LLC DBA LAKEWOOD GARDENS' MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 1 TO PRECLUDE REFERENCE TO OR EVIDENCE OF OTHER INCIDENTS, COMPLAINTS, CLAIMS OR LAW

Opposition - OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

12/20/2019: Opposition - OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

Supplemental Declaration - SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF MARK G MCGRATH

10/22/2019: Supplemental Declaration - SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF MARK G MCGRATH

Reply - REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO ITS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES

10/22/2019: Reply - REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO ITS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES

Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT W D W JOINT VENTURE, DBA DOWNEY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER'S SUR-RPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO NEW EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR, IN THE A

10/25/2019: Reply - REPLY DEFENDANT W D W JOINT VENTURE, DBA DOWNEY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER'S SUR-RPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO NEW EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR, IN THE A

Declaration - DECLARATION OF BRENDAN GILBERT IN OPPOSITION TO LAKEWOOD GARDENS' MSJ

10/15/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF BRENDAN GILBERT IN OPPOSITION TO LAKEWOOD GARDENS' MSJ

Objection - OBJECTION OF PLAINTIFF'S TO DECLARATION OF JOSEPH GOLDMAN IN OPPOSITION TO LAKEWOOD GARDENS' MSJ

10/15/2019: Objection - OBJECTION OF PLAINTIFF'S TO DECLARATION OF JOSEPH GOLDMAN IN OPPOSITION TO LAKEWOOD GARDENS' MSJ

Declaration - DECLARATION OF BRENDAN GILBERT IN OPPOSITION TO WDW'S MSJ

10/15/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF BRENDAN GILBERT IN OPPOSITION TO WDW'S MSJ

Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION BY PLAINTIFF TO CONTINUE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

6/25/2019: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION BY PLAINTIFF TO CONTINUE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Declaration - Declaration of Joshua Allen, RN, C-Al In Support of Defendant Meh Health Management, LLC dba Lakewood Gardens' Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative for Summary Adjudication

2/25/2019: Declaration - Declaration of Joshua Allen, RN, C-Al In Support of Defendant Meh Health Management, LLC dba Lakewood Gardens' Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative for Summary Adjudication

Motion for Summary Judgment

2/27/2019: Motion for Summary Judgment

Minute Order - Minute order entered: 2018-06-12 00:00:00

6/12/2018: Minute Order - Minute order entered: 2018-06-12 00:00:00

SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION BY MARK G. MCGRATH IN SUPPORT OF MOTION BY DEFENDANT, W D W JOINT VENTURE, DBA DOWNEY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER;AND ETC.

4/10/2018: SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION BY MARK G. MCGRATH IN SUPPORT OF MOTION BY DEFENDANT, W D W JOINT VENTURE, DBA DOWNEY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER;AND ETC.

SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION BY MARK G. MCGRATH IN SUPPORT OF MOTION BY DEFENDANT, W D W JOINT VENTURE, DBA DOWNEY COMMUMTY HEALTH CENTER, COMPELLING PLAINTIFF, BERT WALKER, AS AN INDIVIDUAL, TO PROVIDE V

4/10/2018: SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION BY MARK G. MCGRATH IN SUPPORT OF MOTION BY DEFENDANT, W D W JOINT VENTURE, DBA DOWNEY COMMUMTY HEALTH CENTER, COMPELLING PLAINTIFF, BERT WALKER, AS AN INDIVIDUAL, TO PROVIDE V

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS & COMPLAINT

6/19/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS & COMPLAINT

143 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/09/2020
  • Hearing03/09/2020 at 09:30 AM in Department F at 12720 Norwalk Blvd., Norwalk, CA 90650; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/24/2020
  • Hearing02/24/2020 at 08:30 AM in Department F at 12720 Norwalk Blvd., Norwalk, CA 90650; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/21/2020
  • Hearing01/21/2020 at 09:00 AM in Department R at 12720 Norwalk Blvd., Norwalk, CA 90650; Voluntary Settlement Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/20/2019
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial and FSC) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/20/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Ex Parte Application by plaintiff Ex Parte Applica...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/20/2019
  • DocketOpposition (to Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial and Final Status Conference Dates); Filed by W D W JOINT VENTURE, dba DOWNEY (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/20/2019
  • DocketOpposition (to Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial); Filed by MEH HEALTH MANAGEMENT, LLC, a Limited (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/19/2019
  • DocketEx Parte Application (Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial and FSC); Filed by BERT WALKER, individually and as Succesor (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/12/2019
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department C; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (to Limit the Number of Plaintiff's Expert Witnesses) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/12/2019
  • DocketMotion in Limine (DEFENDANT MEH HEAL TH MANAGEMENT, LLC dba LAKEWOOD GARDENS' MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 12 TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE OF OR REFERENCE TO THE INVESTIGATION OF MOVING DEFENDANT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES DURING TRIAL; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DEC); Filed by Meh Health Management, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
288 More Docket Entries
  • 06/19/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS & COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/24/2017
  • DocketMiscellaneous-Other; Filed by BERT WALKER, individually and as Succesor (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/24/2017
  • DocketCIVIL DEPOSIT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/24/2017
  • DocketReceipt (CIVIL DEPOSIT ); Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/24/2017
  • DocketReceipt; Filed by Bert Walker (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/18/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by BERT WALKER, individually and as Succesor (Plaintiff); Bert Walker (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/18/2017
  • DocketComplaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/18/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/18/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/18/2017
  • DocketComplaint filed-Summons Issued; Filed by BERT WALKER, individually and as Succesor (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC657939    Hearing Date: October 29, 2019    Dept: SEC

WALKER v. LAKEWOOD GARDENS, et al.

CASE NO.:  BC657939

HEARING:  10/29/19

JUDGE: MARGARET M. BERNAL

#5

TENTATIVE ORDER

I. Defendant MEH Health Management, LLC’s motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication of issues is DENIED.

II. Defendant WDW Joint Venture’s motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication of issues is DENIED.

Plaintiff to give NOTICE.

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that Decedent Ardelia Walker suffered from pressure sores and sepsis, which resulted in her death at 92 years of age. Decedent was admitted to Lakewood Gardens on 4/19/16 to 5/18/16. At Lakewood Gardens documented that Decedent had a “little sore” on her left buttock and a “skin tear” on her left hip. On 5/18/16, she was then transferred to Kaiser Permanents for treatment, and despite the records at Lakewood Gardens, Kaiser documented three unstageable pressure ulcers. On 5/28/16, she was then transferred to Downey Community Health Center where the nursing staff noted “Stage IV pressure ulcers” and “severe sepsis, hypernatremia, and a kidney injury.” Decedent was then transferred to hospice care, and died on 6/4/16. The operative complaint is the FAC, which asserts causes of action for:

1. Elder Abuse (v. Lakewood Gardens & MEH Health Management)

2. Elder Abuse (v. Downey Community Health & WDW Joint Venture)

3. Wrongful Death (v. all Defendants)

4. Negligence (v. all Defendants)

5. Violation of H&S Code 1430 (v. Downey Community Health & WDW Joint Venture)

I. MEH Health Management, LLC’s MSJ/MSA

Defendant MEH Health Management, LLC (“MEH”) dba Lakewood Gardens (“Lakewood”) moves for summary judgment or alternatively, summary adjudication pursuant to CCP 437c.

Objections

Plaintiff’s evidentiary objections are overruled. Defendant’s evidentiary objections are also overruled.

Standard

A defendant moving for summary judgment/adjudication has met its burden of showing a cause of action has no merit if the defendant can show one or more elements of the plaintiff’s cause of action cannot be established. (CCP 437c(p)(2).)

Issue 1

Defendant MEH contends that Plaintiff cannot prove a cause of action for Elder Abuse.

The elements of a cause of action under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adults Act, Welfare & Inst C § 15600, et seq. (the Act) are statutory, and reflect the legislature’s intent to provide enhanced remedies to encourage private, civil enforcement of laws against elder abuse and neglect. (Intrieri v. Superior Court (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 72, 82.) To state a cause of action for dependent adult or elder abuse under the Act and obtain the heightened remedies provided under the Act, the plaintiff must plead facts showing two elements: (1) the defendant has subjected dependent adult or elder to statutorily-defined physical abuse, neglect or financial abuse; and (2) the defendant acted with recklessness, malice, oppression, or fraud in the commission of the abuse. (Welf. & Inst. Code § 15657.)

According to MEH, Lakewood Gardens is an assisted living environment, i.e. a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly (RCFE), and not a Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) where medical care is provided. Therefore, Lakewood Gardens’ care providers are not permitted to diagnose, stage or treat wounds. (Defense Separate Statement (DSS) 5-6; Goldman Decl., Par. 6.) An RCFE can only house residents with Stage I and II decubitus ulcers. (DSS 9; Davis Decl., ¶ 6, Ex. E.) Should a wound progress beyond a Stage II, that resident is no longer appropriately housed in a RCFE setting. (DSS 10; Davis Decl., ¶ 6, Ex. E.) In order to admit a new resident, an RCFE such as Lakewood Gardens must first receive and review a physician's report and verify that potential resident's diagnoses and health conditions are within the limited universe of conditions RCFEs residents are permitted to have. (DSS 11; Davis Decl., ¶ 6, Ex. E.)

MEH submits the following evidence:

When Decedent was admitted, a physician’s report indicated that Decedent required continuous bed care, but was not bedridden; and that she had a history of skin condition breakdown, specifically noting that Ms. Walker had an open area on her abdomen. That report provided Lakewood Gardens verification that despite her infirmities, Decedent’s diagnoses and health conditions were of the genre that RCFEs are permitted to house. (DSS 18; Davis Decl., ¶ 6, Ex. E.) Lakewood Gardens provided Decedent with all necessary custodial care and supervision consistent with the applicable standards of care for RCFEs, including but not limited creating and following Ms. Walker's service plan; ensuring that she had adequate nutrition, hydration, personal hygiene and preventative measures in place; and appropriately training its staff. (DSS 25; Allen Decl., ¶¶ 36-40.) During her month residence, Decedent was also under the care of multiple physicians, and had multiple offsite medical appointments. (DSS 30-31.) On 5/18/16, a bilateral hip sacral ulcer (Stage II) was identified as well as an unstageable left hip wound. (DSS 33.) Due to Decedent’s unstageable left hip wound, she was transferred to the emergency department at Kaiser.

MEH’s expert, Josh Allen, a registered nurse and certified assisted living nurse, declares that Defendant met the applicable standard of care during Decedent’s residence at Lakewood Gardens. (DSS 36-39; Allen Decl., ¶ 36-40.)

Further, MEH dba Lakewood Gardens cannot be vicariously liable for Downey’s wrongdoing because Lakewood Gardens and Downey are two separate entities and do not operate as a joint enterprise or joint venture. (DSS 40, Hendeles Decl., Par. 12.)

In opposition, Plaintiff contends that “Lakewood argues that it did not violate the Elder Abuse Act because the State Investigation deemed an allegation of neglect unfounded” citing the “Motion at 14.” (Opposition, 13:15-16.) This court has reviewed the Motion at page 14, and there is no reference to any State Investigation deeming that the allegations of neglect were “unfounded.” However, because this evidence was introduced in opposition, it would appear that the State Investigation would support Lakewood’s motion because Decedent was transferred to Kaiser on the same day as a Stage III ulcer was discovered. Plaintiff’s evidence shows that Decedent had Stage II ulcers from 5/7/16 to 5/15/16. (Plaintiff’s Separate Statement (PSS) 17-25.) An unstageable ulcer was discovered on 5/18/16 at 11:00 a.m. (PSS 26.) Decedent was transferred to Kaiser that afternoon at 4:14 p.m. (PSS 32.) According to Plaintiff, a triable issue exists because Plaintiff was not transferred that morning upon discovery of the Stage III ulcer. The court finds this evidence does not create a triable issue. Plaintiff has not presented any evidence that Decedent had a Stage III ulcer prior to 5/18/16. Although Lakewood knew about a Stage II ulcer prior to 5/18/16, the regulations allow RCFEs like Lakewood to keep residents with Stage II ulcers under its care, and the Investigative Report supports this conclusion.

Regardless, the court does find that triable issues exist because Plaintiff’s expert, Cyndy Minnery, a registered nurse of 38 years, opines that Decedent’s placement with Lakewood was inappropriate because she was a “total care patient” and depended on others to perform all activities of daily living. (PSS 68.) RCFEs may not admit residents who depend on others to perform all activities of daily living for them. (See CCR 7615(a)(5).) Further, Lakewood failed to take the appropriate preventative action. (PSS 69-3, 81-84.)

In reply, MEH contends that Minnery’s opinion is incompetent because a violation of the Code of Regulations is a conclusion of law. According to MEH, the determination regarding whether a person requires “health services for or have a health condition” is a determination made by the physician, and the physician recommended the decedent to Lakewood Gardens, citing Davis Decl., Ex. E at 0723-0728. However, whether MEH should have admitted Decedent knowing that she would require “total care” is a triable issue.

Summary adjudication of Issue 1 is DENIED.

Issue 2

Defendant MEH contends that Plaintiff cannot prove punitive damages.

In order to obtain the remedies available in Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15657, a plaintiff must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that defendant is guilty of something more than negligence; he or she must show reckless, oppressive, fraudulent, or malicious conduct. The latter three categories involve intentional, willful, or conscious wrongdoing of a despicable or injurious nature. Cal. Civ. Code §3294(c). Recklessness refers to a subjective state of culpability greater than simple negligence, which has been described as a deliberate disregard of the high degree of probability that an injury will occur. Recklessness, unlike negligence, involves more than inadvertence, incompetence, unskillfulness, or a failure to take precautions but rather rises to the level of a conscious choice of a course of action with knowledge of the serious danger to others involved in it. (Delaney v. Baker (1999) 20 Cal. 4th 23, 31.) Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15657.2 can be read as making clear that the acts proscribed by § 15657 do not include acts of simple professional negligence, but refer to forms of abuse or neglect performed with some state of culpability greater than mere negligence. (Delaney v. Baker (1999) 20 Cal. 4th 23, 32.)

Based on the evidence submitted above, the court finds that Plaintiff has adequately submitted evidence of triable issues regarding Lakewood’s recklessness in admitting Decedent who was a “total care patient,” and in the failure to render preventative care.

Summary adjudication of Issue 2 is DENIED.

Because triable issues exist, motion for summary judgment is also DENIED.

2. WDW Joint Venture’s MSJ/MSA

Defendant WDW Joint Venture (“WDW”) dba Downey Community Health Center (“Downey”) moves for summary judgment or alternatively, summary adjudication pursuant to CCP 437c.

Objections

Plaintiff’s evidentiary objections are overruled. Defendant’s evidentiary objections are also overruled.

Standard

A defendant moving for summary judgment/adjudication has met its burden of showing a cause of action has no merit if the defendant can show one or more elements of the plaintiff’s cause of action cannot be established. (CCP 437c(p)(2).)

Issues 1-6

WDW contends that the nursing and non-physician employees at Downey complied with the applicable standard of care with respect to their provision of medical care, treatment and services to Decedent from 5/20/16 – 5/28/16, and that to a reasonable degree of medical probability, nothing that the Downey staff and/or personnel did or failed to do was a substantial factor in causing and/or contributing to any injury to Decedent. Defendant also contends that its action does not amount to recklessness as contemplated by the Elder Abuse statute.

WDW submits the expert declaration of William Klein, M.D., who attests that the care and treatment rendered by WDW was within the applicable standard, and no act or omission caused or contributed to Decedent’s injury. The court finds Defendant has met its initial burden of production.

In opposition, Plaintiff submits the declaration of Cyndy Minnery, a registered nurse of 38 years, who opines that the care provided by Downey fell below that standard for a skilled nursing facility because Decedent’s ulcers worsened to the point that they became infected and led to sepsis, which was listed as the cause of her death. (Minnery Decl., ¶ 23.) Despite Plaintiff initially being told that Decedent would be seen by a wound care specialist, Downey’s records do not reflect that this occurred. (Id.)

In reply, Defendant contends that Minnery is unable to render any opinion on “medical” causation. However, this action is not one for medical negligence, which requires a medical expert. WDW’s motion is based on the standard of care of “nursing and non-physician” employees. Therefore, the court finds that Minnery, as a registered nurse, is qualified to render an opinion on the care provided by WDW’s “nursing and non-physician” employees.

Accordingly, the court finds that Plaintiff has submitted adequate evidence of triable issues as to Elder Abuse, including the element of recklessness.

Summary adjudication of Issues 1-6 is DENIED.

Issue 7

Defendant contends the 5th cause of action violations of the Patient's Bill of Rights has no merit in that the nursing and non-physician employees at DCHC complied with the applicable standard of care with respect to their provision of medical care, treatment and services to Decedent, and that no act or failure to act by DCHC caused and/or contributed to Plaintiffs' alleged injuries and damages, or the demise of Decedent.

Health & Safety Code § 1430(b) provides a private right of action to all current and former residents at Intermediate Care Facilities to enforce their state and federal rights as residents. "A current or former resident may bring a civil action against a licensee of a facility who violates any rights of the resident or patient as set forth in the Resident's Bill of Rights in § 72527 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations ... the licensee shall be liable for up to five hundred dollars ($500.00), and for costs and attorney's fees." (H&S § 1430(b).)

Based on the evidence submitted above, the court finds that Plaintiff has adequately submitted evidence of triable issues regarding WDW’s failure care within the applicable standards.

Accordingly, summary adjudication of Issue 7 is DENIED.

Because triable issues exist, motion for summary judgment is also DENIED.

Corporate Ratification

Defendant contends at Page 14 that “corporate ratification” of its managing agent is lacking. The court agrees that corporate ratification is a necessary element for imposition of punitive damages against a corporation pursuant to CC 3294(b). However, Defendant does not separately seek summary adjudication of punitive damages.

Further, it is unclear if corporate ratification is necessary for a determination of “recklessness” under the Elder Abuse statute. CC 3294(b) only refers to acts of “oppression, fraud or malice.” The court will hear from the parties regarding this issue.