Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 22STCV11318, Date: 2022-10-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV11318    Hearing Date: October 20, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.       INTRODUCTION

          On April 4, 2022, plaintiff Johnny T. Wang (“Plaintiff”) filed this medical malpractice action against defendant Raymond Shelton, M.D. (“Defendant”) arising from an ophthalmological surgery performed on July 1, 2022.  On July 8, 2022, Defendant filed this demurrer to Plaintiff’s Complaint, arguing that it was barred by the doctrine of res judicata because Plaintiff previously brought an action in small claims based on the same allegations and dismissed the action with prejudice.  The demurrer is unopposed.

II.      LEGAL STANDARDS

A demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the pleadings and will be sustained only where the pleading is defective on its face. (City of Atascadero v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 445, 459.)  “We treat the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law.  We accept the factual allegations of the complaint as true and also consider matters which may be judicially noticed.  [Citation.]”  (Mitchell v. California Department of Public Health (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 1000, 1007; Del E. Webb Corp. v. Structural Materials Co. (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 593, 604 [“the facts alleged in the pleading are deemed to be true, however improbable they may be”].) 

Leave to amend must be allowed where there is a reasonable possibility of successful amendment.  (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 348.)  The burden is on the complainant to show the Court that a pleading can be amended successfully.  (Ibid.)

III.     DISCUSSION

Before filing a demurrer, the demurring party shall meet and confer with the party who has filed the pleading and shall file a declaration detailing their meet and confer efforts.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (a).)  

          Defense counsel, David J. Masutani, declares that he communicated with Plaintiff’s counsel on May 3, 2022, and June 15, 2022, to obtain extensions for Defendant’s deadline to respond so that Plaintiff could have the opportunity to vacate the dismissal with prejudice in the small claims court.  On July 1, 2022, defense counsel informed Plaintiff’s counsel that this demurrer would be filed after no updates were received regarding Plaintiff’s efforts to vacate the dismissal of Plaintiff’s small claims action.  The meet and confer requirement is satisfied.

          Defendant requests the Court judicially notice the Complaint in this action, as well as Plaintiff’s complaint filed on October 15, 2021, in the Pasadena courthouse assigned Case No. 21PDSC01950 and the conformed request for dismissal signed by Plaintiff on October 29, 2021 and entered on November 15, 2021.  The Request is GRANTED.

          Defendant argues that Plaintiff’s action is barred by the doctrine of res judicata because the small claims action was dismissed with prejudice and the dismissal serves as a final judgment on the merits.  (See Torrey Pines Bank v. Superior Court (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 813 [“Dismissal with prejudice is determinative of the issues in the action and precludes the dismissing party from litigating those issues again.”])  The Court has reviewed the allegations of the complaint filed in small claims court as well as the allegations of the Complaint in this action.  Both pleadings allege that Plaintiff suffered harm from Defendant arising from a medical procedure performed on his right eye on or around July 1, 2020.  As both actions arise from the same factual grounds, Plaintiff is precluded from relitigating the merits of his small claims action. 

          Defendant’s demurrer is therefore SUSTAINED.  Plaintiff did not oppose this demurrer or show how amendment is possible.  Accordingly, the demurrer is SUSTAINED without leave to amend. 

IV.     CONCLUSION

Defendant’s demurrer is SUSTAINED without leave to amend. 

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  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 the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.