On September 11, 2018 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Bradbury D.D.S., Michael G,
Bradbury, Rhonda,
Odeh, Ali,
and
Cohan, Kat,
Odeh, Ali,
Fernandez D.D.S, Lyngladen,
Fernandez Dds, Lyngladen,
Kingsley Dentistry,
Kingsly Dentistry,
Lyngadlen Fernandez Dds,
Lyngladen Fernandez D.D.S.,
Ringo Bangalan Dds,
Silagan-Fernandez D.D.S., Lyngadlen,
Suarez-Fernandez Dentistry,
Suarez Fernandez Dentistry And Ringo Bangalan, Dds,
for Medical Malpractice Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
2023-@5-19 @2:43 PDT Ali adeh +18156e@2556 PAGE 16/'St
~~ WN
DocuSign Envelope (0: 4089S0C7-02A9-454 BBLI8/-SBBALIUE 7498F
SUPERIOR cour OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
All Odeh
SAN BERNARDING DISTRICT rh
14167 Flamingo Bay Ln.
Moreno Valley, California 92553
MAY 1.9 2023
Telephone: (815) 600-2550 _
p,
E-Mail: 1275@yahoo,com BY. puity ae
yi
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
8
ALT ODER, © Case No.: CIVDS 1823772
; Hon. Judge John M. Pacheco
9 Praintiff,
vs.
PLAINTIFF ALI ODEH’S
YW EMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
R IOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,
LYNGLADEN FERNANDEZ, DDS, ST. AL
3 OR IN ALTERNATIVE SUMMARY
Defendants, ADJUDICATION ON PLAINTIFER’S
14 SE ND AMENDED COMPLAINT
1S
(Notice Of Motion: Plaintiff's Separate
16
Statement of Undisputed Material Facts:
Separately Bounded Appendix of Exhibits;
Declaration of Ali Odeh; Declaration of Argel
Jai yi; and [Proposed] Order Filed
18 Concurrently Herewith)
19
20
EARING SCHED!
ite: Augasi 1, 2
21
Time: 8:30 AM.
22 Dept: S31
3
23
24 ACTION FILED: September 1), 2018
28 RIAL: August 28, 2023
26
27
28
ee
DRA 1G ND AUTE OF DE
FOR. SUMMARY ny MGMENT, OR OS RNATIVE SUMMARY ADJUDICA
CANE. NOL WS ESQI7T72
DOTEOU PE DAEMEEY OF IF
2623-@5-19 @2:49 POT Ali odeh +181566@2556 PAGE 11/'S¢
~
Docudign Envelope 1: 4D39S0C7-DZA9-4348-9D87-S98oUUE /s96F
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTE, pon snetanene
I INPRODUCTION sven
H STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FA es
A. DEPENDANTS AND THEIR DANGEROUS POLICIES AND PRACTIC
B TREATM) A'TRINGSLY DENTISTRY ENDED WITHA BOTCHED ROOT
CANAL DONE WITIOUT CONSENT
10 First Visit.
Secon] Appointment.
Third Appointment.
12
4 Root canal done without! consent.
43
¢ THE OPERATIVE SECOND AMENDED Ct LAINE AND) PERT ‘NT
4
PROCEDURAL HISTORY 9
15
Business atid Professions Code
16
Banery
7 Gress Negtigence 10
WwW Misrepresentation, 10
19 Relief Saug 10
Qh 10. Pertinent Procedural History . 10
2k If, SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS APPROPRIATE WHERE THE MOVING PARTY
22 DEMONSTRATES THERE ARE NOT TRIABLE ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT u
23
IV. ARGUME! seveencesesny “0 sanasaecennnncensaneeeion sienee {2
24
Dd. DEFENDANTS’ PRACTICES ARE AGAINST ST JARD OF
25
DEMONSTRATE GROSS NEGLIGENCG. wm
26
E DEFENDANTS’ NEGLIGENCE IS OBVIOUS ICELAYMAN 13
27
KINSGLY DENTISTRY ALLOWED ADM. TRATION OF ANE TESTA WITHOUT
28
A K OF PAT ¥ ALS 4
MEMORANDL OF POINT AND é HORT: EN SUPFO! POF PLAINTIFF ALTC H YON
FOR MARY JUDG! NT, OK IN ALTERNATEV SUMMAKY MUDICATIONoN
CAS: , CAVIIS BIITIZ
DNeiey TE DAE AN OE” tat
Document Filed Date
May 19, 2023
Case Filing Date
September 11, 2018
Category
Medical Malpractice Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.