On March 04, 2015 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
Diana P. Blum,
and
Palo Alto Foundation Medical Group, Inc.,
Palo Alto Medical Foundation,
Sutter Health,
for Wrongful Termination Unlimited(36)
in the District Court of Santa Clara County.
Preview
s.»-
ELE
APR 23-1018
Cl’erk of the Court
Superb: Conn CA Comfy d Santa Gare
.7!
DEPUTY
OCWNONUIAL'JN— BY
J. ara
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
DIANA P. BLUM, M.D., Case No. 115-CV-277582
Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR NEW
TRIAL
VS.
SUTTER HEALTH, a California corporation; PALO
ALTO FOUNDATION MEDICAL GROUP, INC., a
California Corporation; PALO ALTO MEDICAL
FOUNDATION, a California corporation
Defendants.
NNNNNNNNN——‘.—._._.____._
ooxnoxmAwN—oooouoxmhww—
This matter came for hearing in Department 16 on April 18, 2018 at 9:00 A.M. Plaintiff,
DIANA P. BLUM, M.D., appeared by and through her attorneys, Theresa J.Barta, Barta Law, and
Charles M. Louderback and Stacey L. Pratt, Louderback Law Group. Defendant, PALO ALTO
FOUNDATION MEDICAL GROUP, INC, appeared by and through its attorneys, Marcie lsom
Fitzsimmons and Hieu Tran Williams, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP, and Defendants,
SUTTER HEALTH and PALO ALTO MEDICAL FOUNDATION, appeared by and through telephonic
appearance of their attorney, Maiko Nakarai-Kanivas, Littler Mendelson, P.C.
On March 9, 2018, Plaintiff filed notice of intention to move for new trial. Plaintiff filed
a motion for new trial and pleadings in support, and Defendants filed their respective pleadings
in opposition. Plaintiff filed pleadings in reply. On April 16, 2018, the Court prepared and
provided the parties with a tentative ruling. Hearing is for oral argument on the motion and
OOOONONUIAUJNv—t
tentative ruling.
At hearing, Plaintiff confirmed that her motion for new trial isnot directed at, and does
not include, Defendants Sutter Health and Palo Alto Medical Foundation or the Judgment
entered in favor of such Defendants. The parties stipulated to service of Order by email.
‘in
After consideration of the pleadings submitted in support of and opposition to the
motion, argument of counsel at hearing, further consideration of the parties’ contentions after
hearing, and application of law, THE COURT ISSUES THE FOLLOWING ORDER:
Plaintiff’s motion for new trial isDENIED.
iT Is so ORDERED.
Dated: Aprilg, 2018 /// //
on Drew C. Takaichi
udge of the Superior Court
NNNNNNNNN——>—.—..—>—-H—.—t.—‘
OOVQMALHN—‘OOWQONMAUJN'H
Document Filed Date
April 23, 2018
Case Filing Date
March 04, 2015
Category
Wrongful Termination Unlimited(36)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
s.»- ELE APR 23-1018 Cl’erk of the Court Superb: Conn CA Comfy d Santa Gare .7! DEPUTY OCWNONUIAL'JN— BY J. ara SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA DIANA P. BLUM, M.D., Case No. 115-CV-277582 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL VS. SUTTER HEALTH, a California corporation; PALO ALTO FOUNDATION MEDICAL GROUP, INC., a California Corporation; PALO ALTO MEDICAL FOUNDATION, a California corporation Defendants. NNNNNNNNN——‘.—._._.____._ ooxnoxmAwN—oooouoxmhww— This matter came for hearing in Department 16 on April 18, 2018 at 9:00 A.M. Plaintiff, DIANA P. BLUM, M.D., appeared by and through her attorneys, Theresa J.Barta, Barta Law, and Charles M. Louderback and Stacey L. Pratt, Louderback Law Group. Defendant, PALO ALTO FOUNDATION MEDICAL GROUP, INC, appeared by and through its attorneys, Marcie lsom Fitzsimmons and Hieu Tran Williams, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP, and Defendants, SUTTER HEALTH and PALO ALTO MEDICAL FOUNDATION, appeared by and through telephonic appearance of their attorney, Maiko Nakarai-Kanivas, Littler Mendelson, P.C. On March 9, 2018, Plaintiff filed notice of intention to move for new trial. Plaintiff filed a motion for new trial and pleadings in support, and Defendants filed their respective pleadings in opposition. Plaintiff filed pleadings in reply. On April 16, 2018, the Court prepared and provided the parties with a tentative ruling. Hearing is for oral argument on the motion and OOOONONUIAUJNv—t tentative ruling. At hearing, Plaintiff confirmed that her motion for new trial isnot directed at, and does not include, Defendants Sutter Health and Palo Alto Medical Foundation or the Judgment entered in favor of such Defendants. The parties stipulated to service of Order by email. ‘in After consideration of the pleadings submitted in support of and opposition to the motion, argument of counsel at hearing, further consideration of the parties’ contentions after hearing, and application of law, THE COURT ISSUES THE FOLLOWING ORDER: Plaintiff’s motion for new trial isDENIED. iT Is so ORDERED. Dated: Aprilg, 2018 /// // on Drew C. Takaichi udge of the Superior Court NNNNNNNNN——>—.—..—>—-H—.—t.—‘ OOVQMALHN—‘OOWQONMAUJN'H