SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC VS JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D., ET AL.
Case Summary
Case Details
-
Case Number:
*******0145
-
Filing Date:
01/11/2023
-
Case Status:
Pending - Other Pending
-
Case Type:
Contract - Other Contract
-
Courthouse:
-
County, State:
Los Angeles, California
Judge Details
Presiding Judge
MARK A. YOUNG
Party Details
Plaintiff
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC DBA SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL AT CULVER CITY
Defendants
DOES 1 THROUGH 25 INCLUSIVE
JORY F. GOODMAN M.D.
JORY F. GOODMAN M.D. MEDICAL CORPORATION
Attorney/Law Firm Details
Plaintiff Attorney
AMIR MICHAEL
Defendant Attorney
KELLER ARIELA O.
Court Documents
9/27/2023: Stipulation and Order (name extension) Stipulation and Order STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER CONFIDENTIAL DESIGNATION ONLY
7/12/2023: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees
7/12/2023: Answer
7/11/2023: Minute Order Minute Order (Case Management Conference)
6/26/2023: Case Management Statement
6/26/2023: Case Management Statement
6/26/2023: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees
6/16/2023: Minute Order Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Strike (not anti-SLAPP) - without Demurrer)
6/9/2023: Reply (name extension) Reply TO PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT
6/7/2023: Opposition (name extension) Opposition TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT
3/20/2023: Motion to Strike (not anti-SLAPP) - without Demurrer
2/17/2023: Declaration (name extension) Declaration OF NICHOLAS A. WEISS, ESQ. RE INABILITY TO COMPLETE MEET-AND-CONFER BEFORE RESPONSIVE PLEADING IS DUE [CCP 430.41]
1/31/2023: Proof of Personal Service
1/31/2023: Proof of Personal Service
1/12/2023: Notice of Case Management Conference
1/11/2023: Summons Summons on Complaint
1/11/2023: Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case
1/11/2023: Complaint
Docket Entries
Hearing05/13/2024 at 09:30 AM in Department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; Jury Trial
[-] Read LessHearing05/06/2024 at 09:00 AM in Department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; Final Status Conference
[-] Read LessHearing01/04/2024 at 10:00 AM in Department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; Informal Discovery Conference (IDC)
[-] Read LessDocketPursuant to the request of moving party, Informal Discovery Conference (IDC) scheduled for 11/14/2023 at 10:00 AM in Santa Monica Courthouse at Department M Not Held - Rescheduled by Court was rescheduled to 01/04/2024 10:00 AM
[-] Read LessDocketInformal Discovery Conference (IDC) scheduled for 11/14/2023 at 10:00 AM in Santa Monica Courthouse at Department M
[-] Read LessDocketStipulation and Order STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER CONFIDENTIAL DESIGNATION ONLY; Signed and Filed by: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC (Plaintiff); As to: JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D. (Defendant); JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D., Medical Corporation (Defendant); DOES 1 through 25, inclusive (Defendant)
[-] Read LessDocketUpdated -- Stipulation and Order STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER CONFIDENTIAL DESIGNATION ONLY: Filed By: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC (Plaintiff); Result: Granted ; Result Date: 09/27/2023
[-] Read LessDocketAnswer; Filed by: JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D. (Defendant); JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D., Medical Corporation (Defendant); As to: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC (Plaintiff)
[-] Read LessDocketNotice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by: JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D. (Defendant); JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D., Medical Corporation (Defendant)
[-] Read LessDocketFinal Status Conference scheduled for 05/06/2024 at 09:00 AM in Santa Monica Courthouse at Department M
[-] Read LessDocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC (Plaintiff); As to: JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D. (Defendant); Service Date: 01/20/2023; Service Cost: 162.39; Service Cost Waived: No
[-] Read LessDocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC (Plaintiff); As to: JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D., Medical Corporation (Defendant); Service Date: 01/20/2023; Service Cost: 58.10; Service Cost Waived: No
[-] Read LessDocketCase Management Conference scheduled for 07/11/2023 at 08:30 AM in Santa Monica Courthouse at Department M
[-] Read LessDocketAlternate Dispute Resolution Packet; Filed by:
[-] Read LessDocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by: Clerk
[-] Read LessDocketCase assigned to Hon. Mark A. Young in Department M Santa Monica Courthouse
[-] Read LessDocketComplaint; Filed by: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC (Plaintiff); As to: JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D. (Defendant); JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D., Medical Corporation (Defendant); DOES 1 through 25, inclusive (Defendant)
[-] Read LessDocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC (Plaintiff); As to: JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D. (Defendant); JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D., Medical Corporation (Defendant); DOES 1 through 25, inclusive (Defendant)
[-] Read LessDocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC (Plaintiff); As to: JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D. (Defendant); JORY F. GOODMAN, M.D., Medical Corporation (Defendant); DOES 1 through 25, inclusive (Defendant)
[-] Read LessDocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk
[-] Read LessTentative Rulings
Case Number: 23SMCV00145 Hearing Date: June 16, 2023 Dept: M
CASE NAME: So. Cal. Healthcare System, Inc., v. Goodman, et al.
CASE NO.: 23SMCV00145
MOTION: Motion to Strike
HEARING DATE: 6/16/2023
Legal Standard
Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof. (CCP 435(b)(1); Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1322(b).) The court may, upon a motion or at any time in its discretion and upon terms it deems proper: (1) strike out any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading; or (2) strike out all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of California, a court rule, or an order of the court. (CCP 436(a)-(b); Stafford v. Shultz (1954) 42 Cal.2d 767, 782 [“Matter in a pleading which is not essential to the claim is surplusage; probative facts are surplusage and may be stricken out or disregarded”].)
“Liberality in permitting amendment is the rule, if a fair opportunity to correct any defect has not been given.” (Angie M. v. Superior Court (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1217, 1227.) It is an abuse of discretion for the court to deny leave to amend where there is any reasonable possibility that plaintiff can state a good cause of action. (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349.) The burden is on plaintiff to show in what manner plaintiff can amend the complaint, and how that amendment will change the legal effect of the pleading. (Id.)
Analysis
Plaintiff brings this action for indemnity against Defendants. A patient of Defendants, Tarverdi, brought an underlying action against Plaintiff. Plaintiff was required to incur attorneys’ fees and pay a settlement of the underlying action. Defendants move to strike the request for attorneys’ fees. Plaintiff does not assert that it is entitled to attorneys’ fees incurred in the instant case. Instead, Plaintiff invokes the ‘tort of another’ doctrine, which provides that “[a] person who through the tort of another has been required to act in the protection of his interests by bringing an action against a third person is entitled to recover compensation for the reasonably necessary loss of time [and] attorney’s fees . . ..” (Prentice v. North American Title Guaranty Corp. (1963) 59 Cal.2d 618, 620.)
However, the doctrine does not apply where a plaintiff has been damaged by the negligence of joint tortfeasors. (Gorman v. Tassajara Development Corp. (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 44, 80.) The doctrine “was not intended to apply to one of several joint tortfeasors in order to justify additional attorney fee damages. If that were the rule there is no reason why it could not be applied in every multiple tortfeasor case with the plaintiff simply choosing the one with the deepest pocket as the ‘Prentice target.’ Such a result would be a total emasculation of Code of Civil Procedure section 1021 in tort cases.” (Id.) Here, it is undisputed that the patient also brought the underlying action against Defendants. (Compl., 1, 12.) Since Defendants were alleged tortfeasors with Plaintiff, the “tort of another” doctrine does not apply. Plaintiff therefore cannot request fees on this basis.
Accordingly, Defendants’ motion to strike is GRANTED without leave.
Dig Deeper
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases