Preview
.‘y
Oxowxloxm-hwm_
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
DIANA P. BLUM, M.D., Case No. 115-CV-277582
Plaintiff, JUDGMENT
vs.
SUTTER HEALTH, a California corporation; PALO
ALTO FOUNDATION MEDICAL GROUP, INC., a
California Corporation; PALO ALTO MEDICAL
FOUNDATION, a California corporation; and
DOES 1 through 20,
NMNNNNNNN——n—n-~_~_—
Defendants.
mflakflkUJN—‘OOOONQMAWNH
Trial in the above-referenced matter commenced January 8, 2018 and concluded
February 13, 2018 in Department 16 of the Superior Court of California for the County of Santa
Clara, the Honorable Drew C.Takaichi presiding; Plaintiff Diana P. Blum, M.D. (”Plaintiff”)
appeared personally and with her attorney, Theresa J. Barta, Barta Law. Defendants, Sutter
Health and Palo Alto Medical Foundation, appeared through itsrepresentative, Anthony
Pacheco, and with their attorneys, Lindbergh Porter and Maiko Nakarani, Little Mendelson,
x
x
xi‘f
1
r5.
p
P.C., until dismissed pursuant to Order granting motion for nonsuit. Defendant, Palo Alto
Foundation Medical Group, Inc. (”Defendant”), appeared through itsrepresentative, David
Gershfield, M.D., and with itsattorneys, Marcie Isom Fitzsimmons and Hieu T. Williams, Gordon
Rees Scully Mansuhani, L.L.P.
©00\lO\UI#LoJN.—-
Ajury of twelve persons was regularly impaneled and sworn. Witnesses were sworn
and testified. After hearing the evidence and arguments of counsel, the jury was duly
instructed by the Court and the cause was submitted to the jury with directions to return a
verdict on special issues. The jury deliberated and thereafter returned into Court with its
verdict as follows:
O
.—..
1. On Plaintiff’s claim for breach of contract, specifically section 4.6 of the Shareholder
--‘
.—-
Employment Agreement, the jury found for Plaintiff.
N
u—t
2. On Plaintiff’s claim for breach of contract, specifically section 10.2.2 of the
Shareholder Employment Agreement, the jury found for Defendant.
Aw
.—-'p—-
3. On Plaintiff's claim for intentional interference with prospective business advantage,
U‘I
—-
the jury found for Defendant.
O\
—-
4. The jury awarded Plaintiff damages in the amount of $28,415.00 for breach of
V
.—t
contract, specifically section 4.6 ofthe Shareholder Employment Agreement.
00
—-
Plaintiff’s claim for violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 was
\D
>—-
bifurcated for Court determination, to occur immediately following discharge of the jury. The
NO Court will issue a separate tentative decision and proposed judgment on the claim.
NH NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that:
NN 1.P|aintiff be awarded damages in the amount of $29,415.00 for breach of contract.
Nw 2. Costs shall be awarded inaccordance with law.
Nh
N U!
'
N O\ Dated: February 2018
7y ,
n. Drew C. Takaichi
_
N \l dge of the Superior Court
N 0°
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
DOWNTOWN COURTHOUSE
191 NORTH FIRSTSTREEr
SAN Jose, CAUFORMA 95113
CIVIL DIVISION
RE: D. Blum vs Sutter Health. et al
Case Number: 201 5-1 -CV-277582
PROOF OF SERVICE
JUDGMENT was delivéred to the parties listedbelow the above entitled case as set forth in the sworn
declaration below.
Ifyou, aparty represenfedby you, on behalf of that
or a witness to be called party needan accommodation under the Amen'can with
Ad.
Disabilities please contad the Coun Administratorsoffice at (408)882-2700,or use the Court'sTDD line(408)882-2690 or the
VoiceJTDD Califomia Relay Service (800) 735-2922.
DECLARA‘HON OF SERVICE BY MAIL: | declare that
|served by enclosing
this notice a true copy
ina sealed envelope, addressed to
each person whose name isshown below. and by
depositing the envelope with postage
fully San Jose.
prepaid. in the United States Mail at
CA on February 22, 2018.
CLERK 0F THE COURT. by Donna O'Hara, Deputy.
cc: Theresa J Barta 5160 Campus Dr Newport Beach CA 92660
Marcie lsom Fitzsimmons Gordon & Rees 275 Battery St#2000 San Francisco CA 941 11
cw-9027 REV 12/08/16 PROOF 0F SERVlCE
Preview
.‘y Oxowxloxm-hwm_ COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA DIANA P. BLUM, M.D., Case No. 115-CV-277582 Plaintiff, JUDGMENT vs. SUTTER HEALTH, a California corporation; PALO ALTO FOUNDATION MEDICAL GROUP, INC., a California Corporation; PALO ALTO MEDICAL FOUNDATION, a California corporation; and DOES 1 through 20, NMNNNNNNN——n—n-~_~_— Defendants. mflakflkUJN—‘OOOONQMAWNH Trial in the above-referenced matter commenced January 8, 2018 and concluded February 13, 2018 in Department 16 of the Superior Court of California for the County of Santa Clara, the Honorable Drew C.Takaichi presiding; Plaintiff Diana P. Blum, M.D. (”Plaintiff”) appeared personally and with her attorney, Theresa J. Barta, Barta Law. Defendants, Sutter Health and Palo Alto Medical Foundation, appeared through itsrepresentative, Anthony Pacheco, and with their attorneys, Lindbergh Porter and Maiko Nakarani, Little Mendelson, x x xi‘f 1 r5. p P.C., until dismissed pursuant to Order granting motion for nonsuit. Defendant, Palo Alto Foundation Medical Group, Inc. (”Defendant”), appeared through itsrepresentative, David Gershfield, M.D., and with itsattorneys, Marcie Isom Fitzsimmons and Hieu T. Williams, Gordon Rees Scully Mansuhani, L.L.P. ©00\lO\UI#LoJN.—- Ajury of twelve persons was regularly impaneled and sworn. Witnesses were sworn and testified. After hearing the evidence and arguments of counsel, the jury was duly instructed by the Court and the cause was submitted to the jury with directions to return a verdict on special issues. The jury deliberated and thereafter returned into Court with its verdict as follows: O .—.. 1. On Plaintiff’s claim for breach of contract, specifically section 4.6 of the Shareholder --‘ .—- Employment Agreement, the jury found for Plaintiff. N u—t 2. On Plaintiff’s claim for breach of contract, specifically section 10.2.2 of the Shareholder Employment Agreement, the jury found for Defendant. Aw .—-'p—- 3. On Plaintiff's claim for intentional interference with prospective business advantage, U‘I —- the jury found for Defendant. O\ —- 4. The jury awarded Plaintiff damages in the amount of $28,415.00 for breach of V .—t contract, specifically section 4.6 ofthe Shareholder Employment Agreement. 00 —- Plaintiff’s claim for violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 was \D >—- bifurcated for Court determination, to occur immediately following discharge of the jury. The NO Court will issue a separate tentative decision and proposed judgment on the claim. NH NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that: NN 1.P|aintiff be awarded damages in the amount of $29,415.00 for breach of contract. Nw 2. Costs shall be awarded inaccordance with law. Nh N U! ' N O\ Dated: February 2018 7y , n. Drew C. Takaichi _ N \l dge of the Superior Court N 0° SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA DOWNTOWN COURTHOUSE 191 NORTH FIRSTSTREEr SAN Jose, CAUFORMA 95113 CIVIL DIVISION RE: D. Blum vs Sutter Health. et al Case Number: 201 5-1 -CV-277582 PROOF OF SERVICE JUDGMENT was delivéred to the parties listedbelow the above entitled case as set forth in the sworn declaration below. Ifyou, aparty represenfedby you, on behalf of that or a witness to be called party needan accommodation under the Amen'can with Ad. Disabilities please contad the Coun Administratorsoffice at (408)882-2700,or use the Court'sTDD line(408)882-2690 or the VoiceJTDD Califomia Relay Service (800) 735-2922. DECLARA‘HON OF SERVICE BY MAIL: | declare that |served by enclosing this notice a true copy ina sealed envelope, addressed to each person whose name isshown below. and by depositing the envelope with postage fully San Jose. prepaid. in the United States Mail at CA on February 22, 2018. CLERK 0F THE COURT. by Donna O'Hara, Deputy. cc: Theresa J Barta 5160 Campus Dr Newport Beach CA 92660 Marcie lsom Fitzsimmons Gordon & Rees 275 Battery St#2000 San Francisco CA 941 11 cw-9027 REV 12/08/16 PROOF 0F SERVlCE