What is professional negligence?

Useful Rulings on Professional Negligence – General

Recent Rulings on Professional Negligence – General

KOUROSH IZADPANAHI VS MARIA ALMA YOLANDA IBARRA DABDOUB, ET AL.

., § 339, subd. (1)), and (4) negligence on or before December 31, 2016 (one-year statute of limitations for professional negligence, per Code Civ. Proc., § 340.6, subd. (a)). Even if the Court were to find that all of these claims were subject to the “last overt act doctrine” of a civil conspiracy theory, which would delay the running of the statute of limitations until the final act in furtherance of the conspiracy had been committed (Kenworthy v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

DANA LUMPKIN ET AL VS LYNN GORDON M D ET AL

.; and Does 1-100 (“Defendnats”) for professional negligence and loss of consortium. On July 26, 2019, Plaintiffs filed an amendment to complaint, substituting in Regents of the University of California for Doe 1. On August 26, 2019, dismissal was entered as to Defendants Lynn Gordon, M.D.; Joseph Lynch III, M.D.; Thomas Mattimore, M.D.; Neesa Patel, M.D.; Stanley Korenman, M.D.

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

DANA LUMPKIN ET AL VS REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNI

Plaintiffs allege professional negligence and loss of consortium in the complaint in relation to deficient treatment rendered from August 2016 through June 2017. On September 6, 2019, the Court dismissed Defendants Joseph Lynch III, M.D.; Thomas Mattimore, M.D.; Neesa Patel, M.D., Lynn Gordon, M.D.; Stanley Korenman M.D.; Russell Kerbel, M.D.; Michael Pfeffer, M.D.; Hamid Hajmomenian, M.D.; Thanh Neville, M.D.; Soo-In Choi, M.D.; Andrew Day, M.D.

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

GUERRERO VS. BALLARD

The elements for a cause of action for professional negligence is the same as that of negligence: (i) that defendants had a legal duty to use due care; (i) a breach of such legal duty; and (iii) the breach as the proximate or legal cause of the resulting injury. (Flowers v. Torrance Memorial Hosp. Med. Ctr. (1994) 8 Cal.4th 992, 997-998; Ladd v. County of San Mateo (1996) 12 Cal.4th 913, 917.) Motion for Summary Judgment as to Defendant Dr. Ho. Defendant Dr.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

GUERRERO VS. BALLARD

The elements for a cause of action for professional negligence is the same as that of negligence: (i) that defendants had a legal duty to use due care; (i) a breach of such legal duty; and (iii) the breach as the proximate or legal cause of the resulting injury. (Flowers v. Torrance Memorial Hosp. Med. Ctr. (1994) 8 Cal.4th 992, 997-998; Ladd v. County of San Mateo (1996) 12 Cal.4th 913, 917.) Motion for Summary Judgment as to Defendant Dr. Ho. Defendant Dr.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

FILIPPINI WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC ET AL VS MEISTER & NUNES PC ET AL

Plaintiffs’ second amended complaint (“SAC”), filed on August 6, 2019, alleges causes of action for (1) professional negligence, (2) breach of fiduciary duty, (3) violation of Business and Professions Code Section 17200 et seq., and (4) conversion. On October 15, 2019, defendant separately served its Request for Production of Documents, Set One, on each plaintiff.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

RANDY MCCLOUD VS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL AT CULVER CITY

As the Court stated above, Plaintiff has alleged dependent adult neglect by these defendants in failing to properly treat his eye injury, going beyond mere professional negligence, and the facts alleged rise to the level of malice or oppression, as Defendants operated with a willful and conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights and safety by failing to sufficiently examine and treat his eye injury for four days while he was under a 5150 psychiatric hold.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

XIAOFAN SUN VS HRC FERTILITY CLINIC, ET AL.

Plaintiff filed a Complaint on May 15, 2019, alleging six causes of action sounding in: (1) Fraud; (2) Fraudulent Concealment; (3) Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations; (4) Professional Negligence; (5) Negligent Training and Supervision; and (6) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

TIFFANIE CALDWELL, ET AL. VS SAMAN BEHNAM, ET AL.

Motion to Strike Emotional Distress Damages “[M]ere negligence will not support a recovery for mental suffering where the defendant's tortious conduct has resulted in only economic injury to the plaintiff…. where a plaintiff sufficiently alleges intentional or affirmative misconduct by an attorney or noneconomic injury resulting from an attorney's professional negligence, recovery of emotional distress damages is permitted.” (Smith v. Superior Court (1992) 10 Cal.App.4th 1033, 1040.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

SUSAN KEETON, ET AL. VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

CCP § 340.5 states, “In an action for injury or death against a health care provider based upon such person's alleged professional negligence, the time for the commencement of action shall be three years after the date of injury or one year after the plaintiff discovers, or through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury, whichever occurs first.”

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

LINDA MENDOZA RAZO VS JIMMY HANG, DPT

Plaintiff’s claims against Hang do not arise out of any alleged professional negligence. Plaintiff has not made a claim against Hang for professional negligence. The fact that Hang’s position as Plaintiff’s physical therapist gave him the opportunity to allegedly sexually batter her does not mean that this action arises out of the professional negligence of Hang as a health care provider. As such, CCP 425.13 does not apply and Plaintiff may seek punitive damages without first obtaining a court order.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

HUYNH, ET AL. V. MISSION DE LA CASA NURSING AND REHABILITATION CTR., ET AL.

Because in Delaney we were construing the term “professional negligence” as used in the Elder Abuse Act, our actual holding did not impinge on the holding of Central Pathology that professional negligence within the meaning of section 425.13 can encompass intentional torts. (Central Pathology, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 192….)

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

JEFF GRABOW VS NEELAKANTAN ANAND, MD, ET AL.

Relevant portions of California Code of Civil Procedure section 340.5 states the following: In an action for injury or death against a health care provider based upon such person’s alleged professional negligence, the time for the commencement of action shall be three years after the date of injury or one year after the plaintiff discovers, or through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury, whichever occurs first . . . .

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

HELEN DOMINGUEZ ET AL VS JAMES B KIRK MD ET AL

Stringent statutory requirements must be met before punitive damages can be alleged in a professional negligence action against a health care provider: In any action for damages arising out of the professional negligence of a health care provider, no claim for punitive damages shall be included in a complaint or other pleading unless the court enters an order allowing an amended pleading that includes a claim for punitive damages to be filed.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

SUSAN CHAN CHOW ET AL VS MA LEYBA ET AL

Wrongful Death, Medical Malpractice, & Survival Action A cause of action for professional negligence (medical malpractice) requires the following elements: (1) duty of care owed plaintiff to use such skill, prudence and diligence as other members of the profession commonly possess and exercise; (2) breach; (3) causation; and (4) damage. (Burgess v. Superior Court (1992) 2 Cal. 4th 1064, 1077.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

ELMAR PEREZ VS WB SIMI VALLEY CDJR, LLC, ET AL.

This subdivision shall not be applicable to an agreement to arbitrate disputes as to the professional negligence of a health care provider made pursuant to Section 1295. (CCP § 1281.2.) Discussion Existence of an Arbitration Agreement Under both the Federal Arbitration Act and California law, arbitration agreements are valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, except on such grounds that exist at law or equity for voiding a contract. (Winter v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JOSEPH K COFEY VS P.L.S. CHECK CASHING

Second Cause of Action for Professional Negligence The demurrer is sustained with 20 days leave to amend. Plaintiff fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and the cause of action is uncertain.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

JEFF GRABOW VS NEELAKANTAN ANAND, MD, ET AL.

Relevant portions of California Code of Civil Procedure section 340.5 states the following: In an action for injury or death against a health care provider based upon such person’s alleged professional negligence, the time for the commencement of action shall be three years after the date of injury or one year after the plaintiff discovers, or through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury, whichever occurs first . . . .

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

ZULA TUCKER LIVING TRUST VS STANLEY D. BOWMAN; ET AL

Bowman for (1) legal malpractice, (2) professional negligence, and (3) fraud. On April 11, 2018, Stanley D. Bowman filed a cross-complaint Zula Tucker Living Trust and Fred Tucker, as trustee and individually. On May 14, 2018, Tucker (self-represented) filed an answer to the cross-complaint on behalf of the trust only. On January 31, 2020, the court noted that on several occasions, the court had advised Tucker to obtain an attorney.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

ZULA TUCKER LIVING TRUST VS STANLEY D. BOWMAN; ET AL

Bowman for (1) legal malpractice, (2) professional negligence, and (3) fraud. On April 11, 2018, Stanley D. Bowman filed a cross-complaint Zula Tucker Living Trust and Fred Tucker, as trustee and individually. On May 14, 2018, Tucker (self-represented) filed an answer to the cross-complaint on behalf of the trust only. On January 31, 2020, the court noted that on several occasions, the court had advised Tucker to obtain an attorney.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

JESUS IGNACIO VALENZUELA, ET AL. VS LAWNDALE HEALTHCARE & WELLNESS CENTRE LLC, ET AL.

To distinguish dependent adult abuse from professional negligence, there must be a showing of recklessness, fraud, malice, or oppression. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

MARCELLA ANDERSON V. KENNETH GOLDBERG, DMD

In Flowers, the court considered the distinction between “ordinary” and “professionalnegligence and concluded “that with respect to questions of substantive law they comprise essentially one form of action.” (Flowers, supra, 8 Cal.4th at p. 995.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

RICHARD ZAJAC VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL.

Defendants counter that the gravamen of Plaintiff’s claim is one for professional negligence, not dependent adult abuse, and Plaintiff cannot assert a claim for dependent adult abuse where he provides only conclusory allegations that Defendants were responsible for Plaintiff’s care. In short, Plaintiff alleges he underwent a surgical procedure with Defendants, which required them to meet his basic needs, including medical care.

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

2301 SM, L.P. VS ADAM WHEELER DESIGN, CORP ET AL.,

Sixth Cause of Action: Professional Negligence “The elements of a cause of action for professional negligence are (1) the existence of the duty of the professional to use such skill, prudence, and diligence as other members of the profession commonly possess and exercise; (2) breach of that duty; (3) a causal connection between the negligent conduct and the resulting injury; and (4) actual loss or damage resulting from the professional negligence.” (Oasis West Realty, LLC v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

LIU VS. GALLARDO

The First Amended Complaint only alleges two causes of action against Liu Architects which are for professional negligence and breach of contract. On the other hand, the claims against the other defendants far exceed the claims against Liu Architects and those claims have nothing to do with Liu Architects or the contract executed between the parties. In addition, the amount paid is $35,000.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 137     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.