On 10/25/2017 JAMES DAVIDSON filed a Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice lawsuit against PROVIDENCE ST JOSEPH MEDICAL CENTER. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
****0947
10/25/2017
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH
DAVIDSON JAMES
MAGARGAL MICHAEL RYAN
CHERN CATHERINE M.D.
PROVIDENCE ST. JOSEPH MEDICAL CENTER
KISHINEFF STEPHEN EDWARD M.D.
DOES 1 TO 100
SCHRECK DOUGLAS M.D.
BUNCH BRUCE M. ESQ.
DEANE RYAN PATRICK
TOMLINSON RODNEY G.
CARROLL RICHARD DOUGLAS
LAW YUK
6/18/2019: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information
7/15/2019: Notice
7/22/2019: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion
7/22/2019: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion
7/22/2019: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion
2/28/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service
2/28/2019: Proof of Personal Service
2/28/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service
3/22/2019: Demand for Jury Trial
3/22/2019: Answer
3/25/2019: Answer
4/4/2019: [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person
4/5/2019: Notice
5/2/2019: Notice of Deposit - Jury
5/2/2019: Answer
5/6/2019: Demand for Jury Trial
10/25/2017: SUMMONS
10/25/2017: COMPLAINT FOR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE (WRONGFUL DEATH)
Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; : OSC RE Dismissal
Hearingat 13:30 PM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment
Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial
Hearingat 10:00 AM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference
Hearingat 13:30 PM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery")
Hearingat 13:30 PM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery")
Hearingat 13:30 PM in Department 5 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery")
DocketMotion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion; Filed by DOUGLAS, M.D. SCHRECK (Defendant)
DocketMotion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion; Filed by DOUGLAS, M.D. SCHRECK (Defendant)
DocketMotion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion; Filed by DOUGLAS, M.D. SCHRECK (Defendant)
DocketNotice of Deposit - Jury; Filed by DOUGLAS, M.D. SCHRECK (Defendant)
DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by DOUGLAS, M.D. SCHRECK (Defendant)
DocketAnswer (of Douglas Schreck, MD's Answer to Complaint); Filed by DOUGLAS, M.D. SCHRECK (Defendant)
DocketAnswer (to Complaint); Filed by CATHERINE, M.D. CHERN (Defendant)
DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by JAMES DAVIDSON (Plaintiff); MICHAEL RYAN MAGARGAL (Plaintiff)
DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by JAMES DAVIDSON (Plaintiff); MICHAEL RYAN MAGARGAL (Plaintiff)
DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by JAMES DAVIDSON (Plaintiff); MICHAEL RYAN MAGARGAL (Plaintiff)
DocketComplaint; Filed by JAMES DAVIDSON (Plaintiff); MICHAEL RYAN MAGARGAL (Plaintiff)
DocketCOMPLAINT FOR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE (WRONGFUL DEATH)
DocketSUMMONS
Case Number: BC680947 Hearing Date: December 16, 2019 Dept: 5
james davidson, et al.,
v.
PROVIDENCE ST. JOSEPH MEDICAL CENTER, et al.,
|
Case No.: BC680947
Hearing Date: December 16, 2019
[TENTATIVE] order RE: MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
|
Background
Plaintiffs James Davidson and Michael Ryan Magargal (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendant Providence Health System-Southern California (“Defendant”) for medical negligence following the death of Leah Davidson. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant failed to treat Leah Davidson properly after she sought treatment for chest pain. Defendant moves for summary judgment. Plaintiff does not oppose the motion, which is granted.
LEGAL STANDARD
“[T]he party moving for summary judgment bears the burden of persuasion that there is no triable issue of material fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law . . . . There is a triable issue of material fact if, and only if, the evidence would allow a reasonable trier of fact to find the underlying fact in favor of the party opposing the motion in accordance with the applicable standard of proof.” (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850.) “[T]he party moving for summary judgment bears an initial burden of production to make a prima facie showing of the nonexistence of any triable issue of material fact; if he carries his burden of production, he causes a shift, and the opposing party is then subjected to a burden of production of his own to make a prima facie showing of the existence of a triable issue of material fact.” (Ibid.) In ruling on the motion, “the court may not weigh the plaintiff's evidence or inferences against the defendant[’s] as though it were sitting as the trier of fact.” (Id. at 856.) However, the court “must . . . determine what any evidence or inference could show or imply to a reasonable trier of fact.” (Ibid., emphasis original.)
DISCUSSION
To prevail on a claim for professional negligence against a medical professional, a plaintiff must demonstrate that: (1) a medical professional had a duty to use the skill, prudence and diligence that members of the profession commonly possess and exercise; (2) breach of that duty; (3) an injury that resulted from the breach of that duty; and (4) actual loss or damage resulting from the breach of that duty. (Banerian v. O’Malley (1974) 42 Cal.App.3d 604, 612.) Expert testimony is the only admissible evidence on breach of the standard of care. (Landeros v. Flood (1976) 17 Cal.3d 399, 410.)
Defendant relies on the declaration of Constance Paine, R.N. (“Paine”), a registered nurse who reviewed Ms. Davidson’s medical records. Paine states that Defendant’s non-physician and nursing staff acted within the standard of care at all times, and that no act or failure to act by a nurse contributed to any of Decedent’ injuries or death. (Declaration of Constance Paine, R.N., ¶¶ 6-9.) Defendant also proffers evidence that the doctors who treated Ms. Davidson were independent contractors, meaning that Defendant is not liable for their care. (Mejia v. Community Hospital of San Bernardino (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 1448, 1454.) Specifically, Ms. Davidson executed Defendant’s “Conditions of Admission” form at the time Defendant admitted Decedent to the hospital, which states that the physicians and surgeons at Defendant’s hospital are not employees of Defendant. (Evidence in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment, Exhibit R.)
Defendant’s evidence is sufficient to satisfy its prima facie burden. Plaintiff proffers no evidence to rebut this showing, and there is no evidence in the record that gives rise to a triable issue. Therefore, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.
DATED: December 16, 2019 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court