Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 78

NANCI A. BERNARD;

DR. PHILLIP R. FLESHNER; 

ATTORNEY C. GREGORY SHAMOUN’S VERIFIED APPLICATION TO APPEAR AS COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE FOR PLAINTIFF NANCI A. BERNARD

Attorney C. Gregory Shamoun’s Verified Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Plaintiff Nanci A. Bernard will be continued to permit correction of the deficiency  noted below.

The parties are to appear at the hearing to set a continued hearing date.

Moving party to provide notice and to file proof of service of such notice.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

This is an action for medical malpractice (res ipsa loquitur). The Complaint alleges as follows. On January 27, 2023, Defendant Dr. Phillip R. Fleshner (“Dr. Fleshner”) diagnosed and operated on Plaintiff Nanci A. Bernard’s (“Plaintiff”) ulcerative colitis and performed a total abdominal colectomy. (Comp. ¶¶ 9-10.) On February 1, 2023, Plaintiff was rushed to Twin Cities Community Hospital for emergency services because she was suffering from severe abdominal pain. (Compl. ¶ 11.) Dr. John Blaney, an emergency surgeon at Twin Cities Community Hospital found a portion of Plaintiff’s colon free-floating in the right upper side of her abdomen. (Compl. ¶ 12.) The specimen was threatening Plaintiff’s life with an infection because the process of decomposition had commenced while still in her abdominal cavity. (Id.) Dr. Blaney reported that Plaintiff had undergone a subtotal colectomy not a total colectomy as previously reported and documented by Dr. Fleshner. (Compl. ¶ 13.)

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On October 13, 2023, Plaintiff filed the Complaint asserting a sole cause of action:

1. Medical Malpractice (Res Ipsa Loquitur) – Surgical Error

On December 22, 2023, Attorney C. Gregory Shamoun (“Shamoun”) filed this instant Verified Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice. 

No opposition has been filed. 

DISCUSSION

I. VERIFIED APPLICATION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE

California Rules of Court 9.40 provides that an attorney in good standing in another jurisdiction may apply to appear pro hac vice in this State by way of written application upon notice by mail to all interested parties, as well as service on the State Bar in San Francisco with payment of a $50.00 fee, so long as that attorney is not a resident of California, does not work in California, and does not perform regular or substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40.) 

The written application must provide the following information: (1) applicant attorney’s residence and office addresses; (2) the courts to which the applicant attorney has been admitted and dates of admission; (3) representation that the attorney applicant is a member in good standing in the courts of admission and is not currently suspended or disbarred in any court; (4) the title of each court and action in which the applicant attorney has appeared pro hac vice in this State in the preceding two years, if any; and (5) the name, address, and telephone number of the active California State Bar member who is counsel of record in the local action.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d).) 

Shamoun applies to appear pro hac vice on behalf of Plaintiff Nanci A. Bernard. (Shamoun App. 3:1-7; Shamoun Decl. ¶ 1.)

Shamoun’s Application contains: (1) his residence and office addresses (Id., 3:8-11; Shamoun Decl. ¶ 3.); (2) the courts to which Shamoun has been admitted and dates of admission (Id., 3:13-28; Shamoun Decl. ¶ 4.); (3) a declaration stating that he is a member in good standing in the New York Bar and the courts to which he is admitted (Id., 4:2-3; Shamoun Decl. ¶ 5.); a declaration stating he appeared Pro Hac Vice in California once in the preceding two years (Id., 4:4-8; Shamoun Decl. ¶ 6.); and submits notice of application on all interested parties and State Bar in San Francisco with payment of the $50.00 fee. (Carattini Decl. ¶ 3, Ex. A.)

However, Shamoun’s Application fails to include the address and telephone number of Sarah Carattini, who is the active California State Bar member who is counsel of record in this action per California Rules of Court,, rule 9.40(d). 

DATED:  January 24, 2024

                                                                 Hon. Jill Feeney 

                                                                Judge of the Superior Court