Preview
V .
V SUPERIOFfiguL
I ~
E
RT 0F CALI
COUNTY OF SAN BERNAFQSS’A
SAN BERNARDINO DuSTRICT
OOOQQUI-BUJNH
Scott B. McFall, Bar No. 80396
Haig Arabian, Bar No. 289861
AGAJANIAN, McFALL, WEISS, TETREAULT & CRIST LLP
346 North Larchmont Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90004
Telephone: (323)993-0198
Facsimile: (323)993-9509
haigga)agajanianlaw.com
Attorneys for Defendants HDMC
HOLDINGS, L.L.C.
dba Hi-Desert Medical Center D/P SNF; HDMC
HOLDINGS, L.L.C.
dba Hi-Desert Medical Center, and HI—DESERT CONTINUING CARE
W
By
W
CENTER
OCT 0 4 2022
Deputy
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNLA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO — SAN BERNARDINO JUSTICE CENTER
LOUIS SALAS, by and through his Successor- ) CASE NO: CIVSB2215 198
in-Interest, Elena Salas, ELENA SALAS, ) Case Filed: 04/27/2022
Individually, ) Hon. Winston Keh, Dept. S33
)
Plaintiffs, ) REPLY BY DEFENDANTS HDMC HOLDINGS,
) L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center D/P SNF;
VS. HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi—Deselt
§ Medical Center, and HI-DESERT CONTINUING
HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert ) CARE CENTER TO PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION
Medical Center D/P SNF; HDMC HOLDINGS, ) TO DEFENDANTS’ DEMURRER
L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center; )
HI—DESERT CONTINUING CARE CENTER )
and Does 1 through 200, inclusive, )
)
Defendants, )
)
LOUIE SALAS, NACHITO SALAS, BRIANNA )
WNQM#WNHO©WQOM#WNHO
NNNNNNNNNHHHHHHHHHH CORTEZ, BECCA SALAS, )
) Date: October 12, 2022
Nominal Defendants ) Time: 8:30 am.
) Dept. S33
TO ALL PARTIES HEREIN AND TO THER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendants, HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi—Desert Medical
Center D/P SNF; HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center, and HI—DESERT
CONTINUING CARE CENTER (“moving Defendants”) hereby submits the following Reply t0 Plaintiffs’
Opposition to Demurrer to Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
///
1
REPLY BY DEFENDANTS HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center D/P SNF; HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba
Hi-Desert Medical Center, and HI-DESERT CONTINUING CARE CENTER TO PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER
\y L
‘
\t
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs’ restatement of language from the Complaint in their Opposition in hopes that something
will stick is unconvincing. Plaintiffs’ position is still unchanged: Plaintiffs only allege that while in the care
\OOONONUIAWNt—i
ofmoving Defendants, Decedent, LOUIS SALAS (“Decedent”) developed a pressure injury that caused him
pain and suffering and ultimately his death on February 2, 2021. (Complaint at 1m 26 and 60). However, the
facts as alleged in the Complaint, 0r rather the lack thereofi fail to demonstrate what, if any, of moving
Defendants’ alleged conduct rises to the level of abuse and/or neglect sufficient to sustain a claim pursuant
to the Elder and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (Wefl. & Inst. Code §15600 et seq. “EADACPA”).
Dependent adult abuse is a statutory cause of action that requires heightened pleading showing that
egregious abuse was committed against Decedent and that the deplorable conduct was ratified or authorized
by a “managing agent” of the corporate facility. This cause of action was not created to award Plaintiffs'
attorneys' fees for a professional negligence cause ofaction. Instead, it was crafted to protect the elderly and
dependent adults against recklessness, fraud, oppression, and malice in the commission of egregious abuse.
The sum of Plaintiffs’ factual allegations in support of their claims dependent abuse and violation
ofpatient‘s bill ofrights can be surmised in a single paragraph (Complaint at 1126). Although Decedent was
a patient/resident of moving Defendants, Plaintiffs plead absolutely no facts demonstrating specific acts or
NNNNNNNNNv—ir—tr—Ir—Ir—Ir—Ar—At—nr—r—n
omissions constituting a pattern of neglect 0r abuse, or what if anything Defendants did or failed to do that
OOQQUIhWNP—‘ONDOOQGUIAUJNr-‘O
caused Decedent’s death or his pressure injury in the first place, how or when the pressure injury started,
whether anything was done or not done causing the pressure injury to worsen, etc. Rather, the gravamen of
Plaintiffs’ Complaint lays in professional negligence, at most, and no amount of any colorful or descriptive
epithets, or legal conclusions, can or will transform a negligence action into statutory actions for dependent
abuse or Violation of patient's bill of rights. Therefore, moving Defendants’ demurrer should be sustained.
II. PLAINTIFFS FAIL TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION DEPENDENT ADULT ABUSE
The facts alleged in the Complaint fail to demonstrate that Defendants’ conduct rises to the level of
abuse and/or neglect sufficient to sustain a claim for dependent adult abuse. A cause of action for Dependent
Adult Abuse must be pled with particularity. Since dependent adult abuse claims are based upon the
EADACPA, they are therefore statutory causes 0f action and must be specifically factually pleaded.
2
REPLY BY DEFENDANTS HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center D/P SNF; HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba
Hi-Desert Medical Center, and HI-DESERT CONTINUING CARE CENTER TO PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER
Preview
V . V SUPERIOFfiguL I ~ E RT 0F CALI COUNTY OF SAN BERNAFQSS’A SAN BERNARDINO DuSTRICT OOOQQUI-BUJNH Scott B. McFall, Bar No. 80396 Haig Arabian, Bar No. 289861 AGAJANIAN, McFALL, WEISS, TETREAULT & CRIST LLP 346 North Larchmont Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90004 Telephone: (323)993-0198 Facsimile: (323)993-9509 haigga)agajanianlaw.com Attorneys for Defendants HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center D/P SNF; HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center, and HI—DESERT CONTINUING CARE W By W CENTER OCT 0 4 2022 Deputy SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNLA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO — SAN BERNARDINO JUSTICE CENTER LOUIS SALAS, by and through his Successor- ) CASE NO: CIVSB2215 198 in-Interest, Elena Salas, ELENA SALAS, ) Case Filed: 04/27/2022 Individually, ) Hon. Winston Keh, Dept. S33 ) Plaintiffs, ) REPLY BY DEFENDANTS HDMC HOLDINGS, ) L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center D/P SNF; VS. HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi—Deselt § Medical Center, and HI-DESERT CONTINUING HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert ) CARE CENTER TO PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION Medical Center D/P SNF; HDMC HOLDINGS, ) TO DEFENDANTS’ DEMURRER L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center; ) HI—DESERT CONTINUING CARE CENTER ) and Does 1 through 200, inclusive, ) ) Defendants, ) ) LOUIE SALAS, NACHITO SALAS, BRIANNA ) WNQM#WNHO©WQOM#WNHO NNNNNNNNNHHHHHHHHHH CORTEZ, BECCA SALAS, ) ) Date: October 12, 2022 Nominal Defendants ) Time: 8:30 am. ) Dept. S33 TO ALL PARTIES HEREIN AND TO THER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendants, HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi—Desert Medical Center D/P SNF; HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center, and HI—DESERT CONTINUING CARE CENTER (“moving Defendants”) hereby submits the following Reply t0 Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Demurrer to Plaintiffs’ Complaint. /// 1 REPLY BY DEFENDANTS HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center D/P SNF; HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center, and HI-DESERT CONTINUING CARE CENTER TO PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER \y L ‘ \t MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs’ restatement of language from the Complaint in their Opposition in hopes that something will stick is unconvincing. Plaintiffs’ position is still unchanged: Plaintiffs only allege that while in the care \OOONONUIAWNt—i ofmoving Defendants, Decedent, LOUIS SALAS (“Decedent”) developed a pressure injury that caused him pain and suffering and ultimately his death on February 2, 2021. (Complaint at 1m 26 and 60). However, the facts as alleged in the Complaint, 0r rather the lack thereofi fail to demonstrate what, if any, of moving Defendants’ alleged conduct rises to the level of abuse and/or neglect sufficient to sustain a claim pursuant to the Elder and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (Wefl. & Inst. Code §15600 et seq. “EADACPA”). Dependent adult abuse is a statutory cause of action that requires heightened pleading showing that egregious abuse was committed against Decedent and that the deplorable conduct was ratified or authorized by a “managing agent” of the corporate facility. This cause of action was not created to award Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees for a professional negligence cause ofaction. Instead, it was crafted to protect the elderly and dependent adults against recklessness, fraud, oppression, and malice in the commission of egregious abuse. The sum of Plaintiffs’ factual allegations in support of their claims dependent abuse and violation ofpatient‘s bill ofrights can be surmised in a single paragraph (Complaint at 1126). Although Decedent was a patient/resident of moving Defendants, Plaintiffs plead absolutely no facts demonstrating specific acts or NNNNNNNNNv—ir—tr—Ir—Ir—Ir—Ar—At—nr—r—n omissions constituting a pattern of neglect 0r abuse, or what if anything Defendants did or failed to do that OOQQUIhWNP—‘ONDOOQGUIAUJNr-‘O caused Decedent’s death or his pressure injury in the first place, how or when the pressure injury started, whether anything was done or not done causing the pressure injury to worsen, etc. Rather, the gravamen of Plaintiffs’ Complaint lays in professional negligence, at most, and no amount of any colorful or descriptive epithets, or legal conclusions, can or will transform a negligence action into statutory actions for dependent abuse or Violation of patient's bill of rights. Therefore, moving Defendants’ demurrer should be sustained. II. PLAINTIFFS FAIL TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION DEPENDENT ADULT ABUSE The facts alleged in the Complaint fail to demonstrate that Defendants’ conduct rises to the level of abuse and/or neglect sufficient to sustain a claim for dependent adult abuse. A cause of action for Dependent Adult Abuse must be pled with particularity. Since dependent adult abuse claims are based upon the EADACPA, they are therefore statutory causes 0f action and must be specifically factually pleaded. 2 REPLY BY DEFENDANTS HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center D/P SNF; HDMC HOLDINGS, L.L.C. dba Hi-Desert Medical Center, and HI-DESERT CONTINUING CARE CENTER TO PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER