I. BACKGROUND 

Plaintiffs Nima Sajjadi, Sima Nobahar, and The Estate of Mahmood Sajjadi (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against defendants Dr. Robert Khorramian, Dr. Ellie Goldstein, and The Rehabilitation Centre of Beverly Hills (“the Centre”) for wrongful death arising from allegations of medical malpractice.    

On February 26, 2024, the Centre filed an application for good faith settlement, in addition to the instant motion for determination of good faith settlement between it and Plaintiffs. 

 As of April 11, 2024, the motion is unopposed. Further, there has been no motion to contest the good faith of the settlement filed to date. 

II. DETERMINATION OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT 

Plaintiffs and the Centre have agreed to settle Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendants, by and through their insurers, for an amount redacted. The Centre has lodged a copy of its counsel’s unredacted declaration, which provides the amount settled for. The Centre argues the only cause of action remaining in this action is for wrongful death, and that Plaintiffs agreed to withdraw their request for punitive damages and attorney’s fees. This matter arises out of the care and treatment rendered to Decedent Mahmood Sajjadi (“Decedent”), in which Decedent had diabetes and developed an infected toe on his right foot. While under the care of defendants Dr. Khorramian and Dr. Goldstein, Plaintiffs contend they prescribed him the wrong antibiotics. As a result, Plaintiffs allege Decedent’s foot was partially amputated, and he subsequently developed sepsis while at the Centre’s skilled nursing facility. The Centre avers Decedent’s death certificate provides that his immediate cause of death was cardiopulmonary arrest secondary to coronary artery disease with years duration and atherosclerosis with years duration, and no other conditions contributed to his death.  

The Centre addresses the factors in Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward- Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488. The Centre asserts that it is a health care provider, and therefore Plaintiffs’ potential general damages against it is limited by $250,000 pursuant to the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (“MICRA”). For special damages, Plaintiffs paid $1,124 in cremation expenses only. The Centre contends that it did not breach the standard of care in providing care for Decedent, and contends that it did not cause or contribute to Decedent’s death based on the cause of death listed on his death certificate, and because Decedent died more than two months after being discharged from the Centre’s facility to an acute care hospital. The Centre avers the amount paid in settlement is generous considering Plaintiffs’ weak case against it, and the limited general and special damages Plaintiffs are potentially entitled to. The Centre avers the settlement is therefore within the ballpark, that its business is no longer operating and that it therefore does not have substantial assets, and that the settlement was not aimed to injure the interests of non-settling co-defendants.  

Here, the Court finds that the Centre sufficiently address the Tech-Bilt factors to show that the settlement was made in good faith. The burden on a motion for determination of good faith settlement rests squarely on the party opposing the finding of good faith. (CCP §877.6(d).)  No opposition was filed. Considering the lack of opposition, no party has met that burden.   

III. CONCLUSION 

The motion for determination of good faith settlement is therefore GRANTED as between Plaintiffs and The Rehabilitation Centre of Beverly Hills. 

Moving party is ordered to give notice.    

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

Dated this 23rd day of April 2024