Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 19STCV16903, Date: 2024-11-05 Tentative Ruling
All parties are urged to meet and confer with all parties concerning this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreed-upon resolution of their matter. If you are able to reach an agreement, please notify the courtroom staff in advance of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion by notifying the court by e-mailing the court at: SSCDEPT28@lacourt.org. Include the word "SUBMITS" in all caps and the Case Number in the Subject line. In the body of the email, please provide the date and time of the hearing, your name, your contact information, the party you represent, and whether that party is a plaintiff, defendant, cross-complainant, cross-defendant, claimant, intervenor, or non-party, etc.
Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may still appear at the hearing and argue the matter, and the court could change its tentative based upon the argument. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If you submit, but still intend to appear, include the words "SUBMITS, BUT WILL APPEAR" in the Subject line. If you elect to argue your matter, you are urged to do so remotely, via Court-Connect.
Note that once the Court has issued a tentative, the Court has the inherent authority not to allow the withdrawal of a motion and to adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the court. This does not excuse a moving party's need to do one of the following: appear; submit; or take a matter off calendar by canceling the motion in the case reservation system before issuance of the tentative ruling if the matter moving party does not intend to proceed.
If you submitted a courtesy copy of your papers containing media (such as a DVD or thumb drive), unless you request the return of the media in your papers, the court will destroy it following the hearing of your matter.
Case Number: 19STCV16903 Hearing Date: November 5, 2024 Dept: 28
Having considered the petitioning papers, the Court rules
as follows.
BACKGROUND
On May 15, 2019, Plaintiff Christopher A. Gough (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Beth A. Moore, M.D. (“Moore”) and Does 1-50 for medical malpractice and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
On February 20, 2020, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint against Moore and Does 1-50 for medical malpractice.
On April 14, 2020, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint against Moore and Does 1-50 for medical malpractice.
On April 21, 2020, Moore filed an answer.
On May 9, 2022, Plaintiffs Deborah Schwartz, individually and as successor in interest to Christopher A. Gough, decedent, and Margaret Gough and Louise Gough, minors, by and through their guardian ad litem Deborah Schwartz (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), filed a third amended complaint against Defendants Moore, California Colorectal Surgeons, and Does 1-50 for wrongful death and survivor damages.
On September 1, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended complaint against Defendants Moore, California Colorectal Surgeons, and Does 1-50 for wrongful death and survivor damages.
On October 3, 2022, Defendants Moore and Colon & Rectal Medical Services Group, Inc. dba California Colorectal Surgeons (erroneously named/served as California Colorectal Surgeons) filed an answer.
On March 7, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a notice of settlement.
On September 3, 2024, Petitioner Deborah Schwartz (“Petitioner”) filed petitions to dismiss the claims of minor Plaintiffs Margaret Gough and Louise Gough. The petitions (submitted on the Judicial Council form for a petition to approve a minor’s compromise) were set for hearing on November 1, 2024. The Court continued the hearings to November 5, 2024.
PETITIONER’S REQUESTS
Petitioner asks the Court to dismiss minor Plaintiffs’ claims despite the lack of a settlement with Defendants.
DISCUSSION
The case arises from the illness and death of the minor Plaintiffs’ father (“decedent”), who received medical treatment from Defendants. Petitioner, the minor Plaintiffs’ mother and decedent’s wife, states that dismissal is appropriate based on information provided in Defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
The petitions include a declaration by Plaintiffs’ counsel stating that, after consulting with experts, counsel “concluded that Plaintiff would not be able to present evidence sufficient to overcome the motion for summary judgment and informed our client of the same.”
The Court grants the petitions and dismisses minor Plaintiffs’ claims.
CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS the petition to dismiss minor Plaintiff Margaret Gough’s claims against Defendants Beth A. Moore, M.D. and Colon & Rectal Medical Services Group, Inc. dba California Colorectal Surgeons (erroneously named/served as California Colorectal Surgeons) filed by Petitioner Deborah Schwartz on September 3, 2024.
The Court GRANTS the petition to dismiss minor Plaintiff Louise Gough’s claims against Defendants Beth A. Moore, M.D. and Colon & Rectal Medical Services Group, Inc. dba California Colorectal Surgeons (erroneously named/served as California Colorectal Surgeons) filed by Petitioner Deborah Schwartz on September 3, 2024.
Petitioner is ordered to give notice of this ruling.
Petitioner is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.