On August 10, 2016 a
Motion,Ex Parte
was filed
involving a dispute between
Bush, Lori,
Dignity Health, A Califonia Corporation,
and
Dignity Health, A Califonia Corporation,
St. Bernadine Medical Center A Business Entity Unknown,
Total Professional Network, Inc,
for Medical Malpractice Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
V ORIGINAL V
THOMPSON & COLEGATE LLP F LE l
D
3610 Fourteenth Street Stépofififisgoum OF CALIFORNIA
IQ P. 0. Box 1299 SAN BERNFAi‘gI'NngrsérglJc'fio
Riverside, California 92502
Tel: (951) 682-5550 SEP 2 o 2022
Fax: (951) 781-4012
BY
DIANE MAR WIESMANN (SBN 124409)
dwiesmann@tclaw.net
FAQ E AN z, DEPUTY
JUSTIN J. JANZEN (SBN 242556)
jjanzen@tc1aw.nct
Attorneys for Defendam/Cross—Complainant, DIGNITY HEALTH, erroneously sued and
served as ST. BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER
SUPERIOR (IUURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
150R THIS COUNTY OF SAN BITERNARDINO, SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT
LORI BUSH, an individual; CASE NO. CIVDSI613161
Plaintiff, JUDGE: Hon. John M. Pacheco
Dept: S31
v.
DIGNITY HEALTH dba ST.
ST. BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER, a BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER’S
business entity form unknown; DIGNITY SUPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITION TO
HEALTH, a California Corporation: and DOES PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PAY COSTS
1 through 200, inclusive, OF PROOF; DECLARATION OF JUSTIN
J. JANZEN
Defendants.
DATE: October 12, 2022
TIME: 8:30 am.
l)l(‘iNI'l‘Y I'HiAL'I‘l l. DEPT: 831
GE'Hd
Cross—Complainanl,
TRIAL DATE: 02/14/2022
V. ACTION FILED: 11/08/2016 (FAC)
TOTAL PR(Q)FESSI(_)NAL NETWORK, INC,
andROES 1400, inclusive, A8
(?mss-I‘kfendanta
XV:|
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD:
Defendant DIGNI'I'Y lIl‘viAlJl‘ll, crmncously sued and served as ST. BERNARDINE
MEDICAL (?}.iN'I‘ER (hereinafter "Defendant”) hereby submits the following supplemental
opposition u) Plaintiffs motion l‘or order requiring Defendant Dignity Health to pay cosfs 0f proof
1
DIGNIW HEALTH DBA s11 BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER’S'S‘UPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITloN To
P1,.A1N'1‘1Fws MOTION To PAY COSTS 0F PROOF
under CCP §2033.420.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I.
DEFENDANT’S RESPONSES REPRESENTED A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO RESPOND
T0 PLAINTIFF’S VAGUE RFAs
As discussed in the initial opposition, Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.420 states, “no cost of proof
award will be imposed if: (l) An objection to the request was sustained; (2) the admission at issue
“was ofno substantial importance;" (3) the party making the denial “had reasonable ground to believe
that that party would prevail on the matterg” 0r (4) “There was other good reason for the failure t0
admit.” Id.
The coun‘s tentative ruling on this motion and its later order for further briefing does not
address this requirement. Defendant continues t0 contend that its denials were reasonable based 0n the
information and knowledge at the time the responses were made. As such, plaintiff is not entitled to
any attorneys fees.
II.
PLAINTIFF COUNSEL’S DECLARATION IS NOT RELIABLE BECAUSE IT CONTAINS
MULTIPLE FALSE REPRESENTATIONS UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY‘
A. Mr. Libman Falsely Claims he Tried t0 Disprovc that TPN was Negliggyj
Mr. llibman claims hc incurred “costs 0f disproving that TPN, the cross complainant was
professionally liable” and that plaintiff “employed an ‘out of the box’ strategy t0 prove that only
21 Dignity was the sole cause Ofthe incident 0n premises liability theory.” (Supp. Dec. 0f Libman 3:5-
22 1 1). First, the RFA referenced was that Dignity admit “no one other than you were the cause of the
23 INCIDISN'I‘.” (Supp. Dec. of Libman 227-8). This request was not limited t0 the premises liability
24 cause of action.
'I‘PN as a doc defendant to the complaint, meaning her claims of
Second, plaintiff added all
26 negligence were also claimed against TPN.
27 Third, Mr. Libman claims that he “spent 5 hours preparing for and defending the defiosition of
28 M1“. Luckclt Again, Mr. Luckctl’s involvement in the case was strategic and designed to prove that
2
DIGNITY HEALTH DBA ST.BERNARDINIL‘ MEDICAL CENTER’S SUPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PAY COSTS OF PROOF
Document Filed Date
September 20, 2022
Case Filing Date
August 10, 2016
Category
Medical Malpractice Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
V ORIGINAL V THOMPSON & COLEGATE LLP F LE l D 3610 Fourteenth Street Stépofififisgoum OF CALIFORNIA IQ P. 0. Box 1299 SAN BERNFAi‘gI'NngrsérglJc'fio Riverside, California 92502 Tel: (951) 682-5550 SEP 2 o 2022 Fax: (951) 781-4012 BY DIANE MAR WIESMANN (SBN 124409) dwiesmann@tclaw.net FAQ E AN z, DEPUTY JUSTIN J. JANZEN (SBN 242556) jjanzen@tc1aw.nct Attorneys for Defendam/Cross—Complainant, DIGNITY HEALTH, erroneously sued and served as ST. BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER SUPERIOR (IUURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 150R THIS COUNTY OF SAN BITERNARDINO, SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT LORI BUSH, an individual; CASE NO. CIVDSI613161 Plaintiff, JUDGE: Hon. John M. Pacheco Dept: S31 v. DIGNITY HEALTH dba ST. ST. BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER, a BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER’S business entity form unknown; DIGNITY SUPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITION TO HEALTH, a California Corporation: and DOES PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PAY COSTS 1 through 200, inclusive, OF PROOF; DECLARATION OF JUSTIN J. JANZEN Defendants. DATE: October 12, 2022 TIME: 8:30 am. l)l(‘iNI'l‘Y I'HiAL'I‘l l. DEPT: 831 GE'Hd Cross—Complainanl, TRIAL DATE: 02/14/2022 V. ACTION FILED: 11/08/2016 (FAC) TOTAL PR(Q)FESSI(_)NAL NETWORK, INC, andROES 1400, inclusive, A8 (?mss-I‘kfendanta XV:| TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD: Defendant DIGNI'I'Y lIl‘viAlJl‘ll, crmncously sued and served as ST. BERNARDINE MEDICAL (?}.iN'I‘ER (hereinafter "Defendant”) hereby submits the following supplemental opposition u) Plaintiffs motion l‘or order requiring Defendant Dignity Health to pay cosfs 0f proof 1 DIGNIW HEALTH DBA s11 BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER’S'S‘UPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITloN To P1,.A1N'1‘1Fws MOTION To PAY COSTS 0F PROOF under CCP §2033.420. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES I. DEFENDANT’S RESPONSES REPRESENTED A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO RESPOND T0 PLAINTIFF’S VAGUE RFAs As discussed in the initial opposition, Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.420 states, “no cost of proof award will be imposed if: (l) An objection to the request was sustained; (2) the admission at issue “was ofno substantial importance;" (3) the party making the denial “had reasonable ground to believe that that party would prevail on the matterg” 0r (4) “There was other good reason for the failure t0 admit.” Id. The coun‘s tentative ruling on this motion and its later order for further briefing does not address this requirement. Defendant continues t0 contend that its denials were reasonable based 0n the information and knowledge at the time the responses were made. As such, plaintiff is not entitled to any attorneys fees. II. PLAINTIFF COUNSEL’S DECLARATION IS NOT RELIABLE BECAUSE IT CONTAINS MULTIPLE FALSE REPRESENTATIONS UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY‘ A. Mr. Libman Falsely Claims he Tried t0 Disprovc that TPN was Negliggyj Mr. llibman claims hc incurred “costs 0f disproving that TPN, the cross complainant was professionally liable” and that plaintiff “employed an ‘out of the box’ strategy t0 prove that only 21 Dignity was the sole cause Ofthe incident 0n premises liability theory.” (Supp. Dec. 0f Libman 3:5- 22 1 1). First, the RFA referenced was that Dignity admit “no one other than you were the cause of the 23 INCIDISN'I‘.” (Supp. Dec. of Libman 227-8). This request was not limited t0 the premises liability 24 cause of action. 'I‘PN as a doc defendant to the complaint, meaning her claims of Second, plaintiff added all 26 negligence were also claimed against TPN. 27 Third, Mr. Libman claims that he “spent 5 hours preparing for and defending the defiosition of 28 M1“. Luckclt Again, Mr. Luckctl’s involvement in the case was strategic and designed to prove that 2 DIGNITY HEALTH DBA ST.BERNARDINIL‘ MEDICAL CENTER’S SUPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PAY COSTS OF PROOF