Motion,Ex Parte: LORI BUSH -V- ST BERNADINE MEDICAL CENTER Print

• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                1   THOMPSON        COLEGATE LLP
                                                                                 F I L E D
        3610 Fourteenth Street                                              SUPERIOR COURT
                                                                       COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINC
    2   P O Box 1299                                                    SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT
        Riverside California 92502
    3   Tel   951 682 5550
        Fax    951 781 4012
                                                                             fl T 2 1 2019
    4

        DIANE MAR WIESl IANN SBN 124409                               By
                                                                                             Deputy
    5   dwiesmann@tclaw net
        JUSTIN J JANZEN SBN 242556
    6   jjanzen@tclaw net


    7
        Attorneys for Defendant Cross Complainant DIGNITY HEALTH erroneously sued and
        served as ST BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER
    8



    9

                                SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10

                 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT
11



12

        LORI BUSH      an   individual                         CASE NO CIVDS 1613161
13

                        Plaintiff                              JUDGE       Hon John M Pacheco
14                                                             Dept        S31
        v

    5                                                          DEFENSE OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF
        ST BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENT ER a                        EX PARTE APPLICATION TO STRIKE
    6   business entity form unknown DIGNITY                   EXPERT TESTIlVIONY OR TO
        HEALTH a California Corporation and DOES 1             PRECLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY
17      through 200 inclusive
                                                               Hearing date 10 21 19
                                                               Time              8 30 a m
ts                      Defendants                             Dept              S31

    9                                                          TRIAL DATE               11 04 2019
        DIGNITY HEALTH                                         ACTION FILED             11 08 2016 FAC
20

                        Cross Complainant
21

        v

22

        TOTAL PROFESSIONAL NETWORK INC
23      and ROES 1 100 inclusive


24                      Cross Defendants


25


26
                Plaintiffs ex parte is an improper attempt to preclude defense experts from testifying at trial
2       Not only is the instant ex parte an improper vehicle for her request but plaintiff has also manipulated

28



                                                           1
                                    DEFENSE OPPOSITION TO EX PARTE APPLICATION
    1   and misrepresented the state of the case to suit her request The defendants ask the court to deny the
        improper ex parte application and her motion
    2

                    This matter has been on the court s trial calendar no less than four times The last time it was
    3
              for trial        June 3 2019       Plaintiff             has
        set               on                                 counsel         e    ibited a pattern of failing to cooperate with
    4
        other counsel in providing dates for deposition of his experts Earlier this year when plaintiffdid not
    5
        confirm nor produce any of her experts for deposition and certificates of non appearance were
    6   taken at considerable cost tot eh defense plaintiff counsel advised that he was absent due to a cancer

        scare on the part of his wife           Because the case was thus not ready for trial and in deference to his
        family situation the parties stipulated to continue the trial The court is asked to take judicial notice
    s

        of    the   stipulation   and order to continue trial       filed 5 24 19        The court continued the matter for Trial
    9
        Readiness Conference to 10131 19 and Trial to 11 4 19
10
                    On 5 16 19 plaintiff counsel advised in an email that he would                          shoot for 9 3 6 then for
11      plaintiffs     experts as much as possible              Plaintiff counsel had a pre paid family vacation set in
12      August Dates        were provided      for   plaintiffs experts on       8i23 Brad Avrit         9 4 Serge Ubukhoff David

        Orlowski          9 5 Lawrence        Lievense       9 6                   Luckett               10 1    Eris Barillas
13                                                                   Timothy                     and                                In

        accommodation to a pre paid vacation on the part of Mr Diamond in September                                       the defense
14

        provided       its defense     expert schedule      for 10 3   Boukidis            Renteria       10 4           Miller   10 7
                                                                                     and                         Henry
15

         Suzy       Kim   and
                                Tony   Feuerman        10 10 Mark Gomez            and   Tom Parco        See attached calendars of
16
        expert       depositions     Amended notices of deposition were served by the defense on 5 2ll19
l       Amended                     defense             depositions
                       notice of               expert                  was   served on 5       23 19     Not only were the defense
18      notices served before that of plaintiffs but more importantly plaintiff specifically agreed to produce
19      his experts for deposition during the first week of September before the defense experts would be
        deposed in October upon Mr Diamond s return from vacation
20

                    In June and August there were adjustments made to the locations of depositions ofplaintiff s
21
        experts      but the dates     were   not changed       This also evidences plaintiffs acknowledgment that his
22
        expert depositions would go forward in September before the depositions of defense experts
23                  The deposition      of   Brad Avrit    went    forward   as   noticed on      8 23    Then on 8 26 19 plaintiff

24      attorney Mr Libman           emailed that     he   needed   to move Lievense       s   9 5 19 deposition     I am waitingfor
25
        new    datesfrom hirra          emphasis added No new dates have ever been received

26
                    TPN attorney Mr Diamond reminded the parties by email of his pre planned days out of the
        office       9 6 13 and 9 19 30
27



28



                                                                        2
                                          DEFENSE OPPOSITION TO EX PARTE APPLICATION