Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 23SMCV02548, Date: 2025-02-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV02548    Hearing Date: February 14, 2025    Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

Tebbens v. McKinnon, Case no. 23SMCV02548

Hearing date February 14, 2025

Defendant McKinnon’s Motion to Compel Discovery

Defendant Cedars-Sinai’s Motion for Judgments on the Pleadings

Plaintiff Tebbens, in pro per, sues defendants McKinnon, M.D., and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center for alleged medical negligence. McKinnon moves to compel responses to form and special interrogatories, set one, request for admissions, set one, and requests for production of documents, set one, served 7/23/24 and an order deeming RFAs admitted. Cedars-Sinai moves for judgment on the pleadings following the court’s granting of its motion to deem RFAs admitted 7/15/24. The motions are unopposed.

Defendant Cedars-Sinai’s RJN

Cedars-Sinai requests judicial notice of (1) defendant Cedars-Sinai’s RFAs, set one, filed 5/28/24; and (2) the ruling on its motion to deem RFAs, set one, admitted, on 7/15/24. Judicial notice of records is proper per Cal. Evid. Code §452(d). GRANTED.

Defendant McKinnon’s Motion to Compel Discovery

When a party fails to timely respond to written discovery requests, including interrogatories and requests for production of documents, propounding party can move for an order compelling a response without objections. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §2023.290. If a party fails to serve timely responses to requests for admission, the requesting party can move for an order deeming the truth of any matter specified in the requests admitted. Code of Civ. Proc. §2033.280.

Defendant McKinnon served form and special interrogatories, set one, request for admissions, set one, and requests for production of documents, set one on 7/23/24. Decl. Schofield para. 3. Responses were due 8/22/24; plaintiff did not respond. Id. McKinnon contacted plaintiff requesting responses without objections. Decl. Schofield para. 4. Plaintiff did not serve responses or request an extension. Id. To date, plaintiff has not provided any responses or sought any extensions. The motion is unopposed.

Defendant McKinnon’s motion to compel production and deem RFAs admitted is GRANTED. Plaintiff to respond to McKinnon’s Form Interrogatories, Set One, Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Production of Documents, Set One without objection, under oath within fifteen days.

Defendant Cedars-Sinai’s MJOP

A motion for judgment on the pleadings should be granted when, under “the pleadings, together with matters that may be judicially noticed, it appears that a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Schabarum v. California Legislature (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 1205, 1216. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §438 permits a defendant to make a motion for judgment on the pleadings only pursuant to the provisions set forth in Cal. Code Civ. Proc §438(c)(1): (A) if the moving party is a plaintiff, that the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action and the answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the complaint; or (B) if the moving party is a defendant, that either (i) the court has no jurisdiction of the subject of the complaint; or (ii) the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

Cedars-Sinai moves for judgment on the pleadings under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §438(c)(1)(B)(ii). The motion is unopposed. Plaintiff was aware of the motion, and meet and confer efforts were rebuffed. Decl. Liu para. 10; exh. F.

A medical negligence claim requires: (1) a duty to use such skill, prudence, and diligence as other members of the profession commonly possess and exercise; (2) a breach of the duty; (3) a proximate causal connection between the negligent conduct and the injury; and (4) resulting loss or damage. CACI 500. Cedars-Sinai argues plaintiff admitted, through the court’s 7/15/24 granting of the motion to deem RFAs admitted, that: (1) Cedars-Sinai did not breach its applicable standard of care; (2) plaintiff’s injury was not a result of Cedars-Sinai’s care; and (3) plaintiff is unable to establish all elements necessary for a claim of medical negligence. Decl. Liu para. 9; exh. B. Plaintiff cannot establish the necessary elements of breach or causation. Judgment on the pleadings is proper. As no opposition is filed, the motion is GRANTED.