What is medical malpractice?

Useful Rulings on Medical Malpractice

Rulings on Medical Malpractice

1-25 of 3536 results

LILLIAN CORWIN VS. LOS ROBLES HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER

Initially, the plaintiffs alleged theories of wrongful death, negligence, elder abuse, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and medical malpractice against Westlake. On August 24, 2010, the court sustained Westlake's demurrer to the causes of action for elder abuse, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and medical malpractice.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

ANIDIA TORRES ET AL VS YASER KHILFEH MD ET AL

.; Marilyn Bacud; Oksoon Yang; Los Angeles Doctors Hospital; Avanti Hospitals, LLC; and Does 1 to 25 for (1) negligence – medical malpractice; (2) negligence – medical malpractice; (3) negligence – medical malpractice; (4) negligence – medical malpractice; and (5) negligence – infliction of emotional distress. On June 21, 2018, the Court dismissed the action without prejudice after no parties appeared at the trial. On July 20, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration.

  • Hearing

CANDELARIA VS. ALHKOULI

The first amended complaint alleges only one cause of action for medical malpractice (wrongful death) based on defendants’ “general negligence” as medical professionals or, stated another way, “medical malpractice.” At paragraph 10 of the judicial form first amended complaint, plaintiff has marked off two boxes, indicating that he is alleging general negligence and medical malpractice as “attached.”

  • Hearing

MILLER VS. SIZEMORE

The first and second causes of action appear to be medical malpractice causes of action. The first cause of action is for medical malpractice. The second cause of action is for failure to obtained informed consent, which is covered by C.C.P. § 340.5. Warren v. Schecter (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 1189, 1194.

  • Hearing

YDIGORAS VS DESERT AIDS RE: DEMURRER TO 2ND AMENDED COMPLAINT OF MICHAEL YDIGORAS BY DESERT AIDS PROJECT, INC

The fourth cause of action is also labeled “medical malpractice,” but it is based upon Aronow’s alleged failure “to communicate information in a sexually appropriate manner during office visit with patient/plaintiff and Dr. Aronow on November 22, 2016.” The fifth cause of action for “medical malpractice” is based upon based upon the alleged “retaliation action” of Defendant’s executive director, Dr. David H.

  • Hearing

TAMMY PRINGLE VS JEFFREY D HOEFFLIN MD

Plaintiff has not alleged any facts to support her action for medical malpractice against Defendant. In her amended complaint, Plaintiff must allege all relevant facts supporting her claim for medical malpractice against Defendant. Plaintiff should also attach additional pages to the form complaint for each separate cause of action asserted against Defendant. Plaintiff is given 15 days leave to amend. Defendant to give notice.

  • Hearing

PEDRO GONZALEZ VS RICARDO E CHAMBI M D ET AL

To avoid summary judgment in a medical malpractice case, a plaintiff must produce expert testimony to rebut any defense expert who asserted the defendant acted within the standard of care. (Id. at 836.) In a motion for summary judgment by defendant in a medical malpractice action, expert testimony is required in order to establish a medical practitioner’s standard of acrecare within the community.

  • Hearing

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CHARLES TROTTER VS JONATHAN G. PASSARO

Defendant argues that this set of factual allegations gives rise to a wrongful death action and that the medical malpractice and negligence claims are duplicative. In opposition, Plaintiff argues that Decedent suffered distinct injuries which give rise to separate causes of action for negligence and medical malpractice, as well as wrongful death. Defendant is correct.

  • Hearing

NORMA SCHLAGER VS PROVIDENCE SAINT JOHN'S HEALTH CENTER ET A

Whether the Negligence and Medical Malpractice Claims are Improper Defendant Putta contends that Plaintiff’s negligence claim is improper because it is duplicative of her cause of action for medical malpractice.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ANNALISA HUGHES VS PROVIDENCE LITTLE CO OF MARY MEDICAL CENT

Plaintiff Annalisa Hughes (“Plaintiff”) opposes and argues that the loss of consortium claim is sufficiently distinct from the medical malpractice claim (wrongful death) because the loss of consortium claim accrued prior to the death of Adam Hughes (“Decedent”) and is based on the time following the surgeries until the death. Plaintiff argues that the medical malpractice action on the other hand did not accrue until after the death.

  • Hearing

MICHAEL W. PINCHER VS ANTELOPE VALLEY HEALTHCARE DISTRICT

Plaintiff filed the initial Complaint on March 13, 2018, alleging three (3) causes of action for (1) Professional Negligence (Medical Malpractice – Survival Action); (2) Professional Negligence (Medical Malpractice – Wrongful Death); and (3) Elder Abuse.

  • Hearing

DAVID BABAYAN VS SAM NIKOU M D ET AL

CAUSES OF ACTION IN COMPLAINT: 1) Wrongful Death based on Medical Malpractice RELIEF REQUESTED: Summary Judgment on Complaint DISCUSSION: Trial is set for August 14, 2017. This hearing concerns the motion for summary judgment brought by the Defendant, Ricky Sedgwick. The Plaintiff’s complaint includes a single cause of action for wrongful death based on medical malpractice.

  • Hearing

SCHOTZ VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

The FAC asserted causes of action for (1) ordinary negligence; (2) medical malpractice - failure to diagnose and treat injuries from fall; (3) medical malpractice - failure to diagnose and treat infection contracted at emergency room; (4) medical malpractice - abandonment of patient; (5) elder abuse; (6) intentional infliction of emotional distress ("IIED"); and (7) loss of consortium. Defendants demurred to all causes of action except the medical malpractice claims.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

DAVID BABAYAN VS SAM NIKOU M D ET AL

CAUSES OF ACTION IN COMPLAINT: 1) Wrongful Death based on Medical Malpractice RELIEF REQUESTED: Summary Judgment on Complaint DISCUSSION: Trial is set for August 14, 2017. This hearing concerns the motion for summary judgment brought by the Defendant, Alfret Moradian. The Plaintiff’s complaint includes a single cause of action for wrongful death based on medical malpractice.

  • Hearing

PRINCESS NAOPE, ET AL. VS GWEN ALLEN, M.D., ET AL.

Analysis Defendants demur on the basis that Plaintiffs’ second cause of action, medical malpractice–direct victim emotional distress, is not a separate cause of action from the medical malpractice cause of action. Regretfully, the opposition does not address this point; instead, it focuses on the elements of a direct victim emotional distress claim. “Negligent infliction of emotional distress is not an independent tort. . . . [Citation.]” (Catsouras v.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

  • Judge

    Salvatore Sirna or Gary Y. Tanaka

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MONICA PEREZ VS. MATS F. HAGSTROM M.D ET AL

While the second cause of action for lack of informed consent is a species of medical malpractice, by her second cause of action plaintiff has essentially alleged a second cause of action for medical malpractice distinct from her first cause of action for medical malpractice. CACI 500 and 501 apply to the first cause of action, while CACI 532 and 533 apply to the second cause of action. The third and fourth causes of action are distinct claims from a medical malpractice claim, albeit there is some overlap.

  • Hearing

DAVID DARBINYAN ET AL VS CSJ PROVIDENCE ST JOSEPH MEDICAL CE

Plaintiffs oppose and argue that the loss of consortium claim is sufficiently distinct from the wrongful death/medical malpractice claim because the loss of consortium claim accrued prior to the death of Decedent and is based on the time following the date of his injury, June 21, 2014, until his death on December 19, 2016. Plaintiffs argue that the medical malpractice action on the other hand did not accrue until after Decedent’s death.

  • Hearing

ELIZABETH LEWIS COLE VS LONG BEACH MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ET AL

Here, reading the allegations in the complaint liberally and in context for pleading purposes, the court finds that Plaintiff may maintain an action for medical malpractice and premises liability. However, the court finds that the negligence cause of action is duplicative of the medical malpractice claim and thus subject to demurrer.

  • Hearing

HOSIE BENNETT VS HUNTINGTON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

As such, the demurrer to the 1st cause of action for negligence, which is directed only against Hospital is sustained without leave to amend as it is duplicative of the 2nd cause of action for medical malpractice (alleged against all Defendants). To the extent the 1st cause of action for negligence alleges any additional facts that were not alleged in the 2nd cause of action for medical malpractice, Plaintiff may amend the 2nd cause of action to include those facts.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LAURA GIANNI, ET AL. VS CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER, ET AL.

These allegations are not included in Plaintiffs’ medical malpractice cause of action. As such, this cause of action is not duplicative of Plaintiffs’ medical malpractice cause of action. Instead, the negligent misrepresentation cause of action amounts to a second count of Plaintiff’s medical malpractice cause of action. Thus, the negligent misrepresentation cause of action alleges sufficient facts to state a second count of medical malpractice against Defendants.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

SCHOTZ VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

The FAC asserted causes of action for (1) ordinary negligence; (2) medical malpractice - failure to diagnose and treat injuries from fall; (3) medical malpractice - failure to diagnose and treat infection contracted at emergency room; (4) medical malpractice - abandonment of patient; (5) elder abuse; (6) intentional infliction of emotional distress ("IIED"); and (7) loss of consortium. Defendants demurred to all causes of action except the medical malpractice claims.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

TRUJILLO VS MAGINOT

Thus, the court grants summary judgment as to the remaining claim for negligence/medical malpractice.

  • Hearing

CAMERON GRIMSLEY VS PROVIDENCE ST JOHNS HEALTH CENTER

In this case, the complaint makes clear that Defendant allegedly committed medical malpractice relating to a tonsillectomy and turbinoplast. The allegations are sufficient at this stage of the litigation. Defendant also demurs to the cause of action for general negligence. The complaint makes clear that the gravamen of this action is one for medical malpractice. Medical negligence is one type of negligence, to which general negligence principles apply. (Massey v.

  • Hearing

MARIA TERESA ABREGO ET AL VS BRODERICK FRANKLIN M D ET AL

BACKGROUND This is a medical malpractice case. Maria Teresa Abrego, Omar Jesus Abrego, Nathan Anthony Abrego, and Chastity Abrego (“Plaintiffs”) filed a complaint on October 27, 2015 asserting a cause of action for wrongful death – medical malpractice/negligence against Broderick Franklin, M.D., Jesus Muro, M.D., Armen Hovhannisyan, M.D., Artur Ambartsumyan, P.A., Prime Healthcare Services, Inc., Centinela Hospital Medical Center (collectively “Defendants”).

  • Hearing

KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS VS. JAMES A. MCCOY

The materials submitted by McCoy do not support his premise that Enochian’s firms solely practice medical malpractice defense. The select excerpts from the Donnelly website appear to be limited to that firm’s description of their work related to medical malpractice defense. The excerpts related to the Low McKinley firm reflect numerous practice areas. Indeed, McCoy complains that Low McKinley represents plaintiffs in personal injury matters, as long as those cases do not involve medical negligence.

  • Hearing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 142     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.