SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, NORTHWEST DISTRICT – VAN NUYS
DAVID ALOMATSI §
Plaintiff, §
§
v. § Case No: 19STCV21741
§
DEANCO HEALTHCARE, LLC a.k.a. §
MISSION COMMUNITY HOSPITAL; §
DOES 1 TO 100 §
Defendants. §
NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Please take notice that on Insert Date at Insert Time, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in the above-entitled Court, Plaintiff will and hereby does move the Court for an order granting summary judgment in his favor and against the named Defendants.
This Motion is made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 on the ground that there is no genuine dispute of material fact and Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law because the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could not return a verdict for Defendants in this action.
This Motion is based upon this Notice of Motion, the accompanying Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment, and such oral and documentary evidence as may be presented at or before the hearing of the Motion.
Dated:
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________________
David Alomatsi
Insert Address
Insert State & ZIP Code
Insert Phone Number
Insert Email
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, NORTHWEST DISTRICT – VAN NUYS
DAVID ALOMATSI §
Plaintiff, §
§
v. § Case No: 19STCV21741
§
DEANCO HEALTHCARE, LLC a.k.a. §
MISSION COMMUNITY HOSPITAL; §
DOES 1 TO 100 §
Defendants. §
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff brings this Motion for Summary Judgment before this Honorable Court and avers as follows:
- Summary judgment is “an integral part of the Federal Rules as a whole, which are designed to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action.” Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 327 (1986).
- Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, on motion of a party, the court “shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).
- The non-moving party must “do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts.” Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586 (1986).
- Further, one may not oppose a properly supported summary judgment motion by mere reliance on the pleadings. Celotex Corp., 477 U.S. at 324.
- Instead, the non-movant must present “concrete evidence supporting their claims.” Cloverdale Equip. Co. v. Simon Aerials, Inc., 869 F.2d 934, 937 (6th Cir. 1989).
- The non-movant’s “failure to present any evidence to counter a well-supported motion for summary judgment alone is grounds for granting the motion.” Everson v. Leis., 556 F.3d 484, 496 (6th Cir. 2009).
- Plaintiff has clearly established the material facts of his case.
- Plaintiff was admitted at Defendant’s hospital on 05/19/2017. He was able to walk freely at the time.
- A few days later, Defendants’ staff told Plaintiff that he had an infection and that he would be treated with antibiotics via intravenous (I.V.) treatment.
- Plaintiff was told about the drug’s seizure side effect by one of Defendants’ nurses at the time. Plaintiff asked for extra precautions and to be closely monitored during the time the medication was to be administered to him because he was familiar with it.
- Plaintiff demanded that an anti-seizure treatment be administered to him in order to monitor the seizure’s expected side effects. Plaintiff was told by Defendants’ nurses that this medication has seizure side effects for all.
- Defendants’ nurse failed to administer the medication to Plaintiff at the time the nurse said the drug would be administered. Plaintiff asked the nurse for it, and she said she’d give it to him later.
- Later, Plaintiff asked the nurse for the medication again and the nurse informed him that other nurses were not comfortable with the idea of administering the medication to him.
- Eventually, Plaintiff was not given the anti-seizure medication. As a result, Plaintiff’s condition worsened.
- Plaintiff was transferred to Maclay Healthcare Center then back to Mission County Hospital. His condition kept getting worse. His recovery became more difficult and required more time. Plaintiff experienced a lot of pain, suffering and misery as a result of Defendants’ failure to administer anti-seizure medication. He could not be able to walk on his own and became bedridden.
- If Defendants’ staff had administered the anti-seizure medication, Plaintiff would not have undergone the pain, suffering and misery he has gone through.
- There is no genuine dispute as to the material facts outlined above.
- Defendants owed Plaintiff duty of care to ensure he got the appropriate treatment to enable him get a speedy recovery.
- Defendants breached this duty by failing to administer anti-seizure medication to Plaintiff. This worsened Plaintiff’s condition instead of helping him get a speedy recovery. As a result of Defendants’ breach of duty, Plaintiff endured prolonged pain, suffering and misery that could have been avoided if Defendants had administered the anti-seizure medication.
- Plaintiff was also admitted to other hospitals to get further treatment. The hospitals include Kindred Hospital, Las Flores Convalescent Hospital and Gardena Memorial Hospital.
REASONS WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant him the following reliefs:
- Grant this Motion for Summary Judgment;
- Award Plaintiff general damages;
- Award Plaintiff such equitable relief as may be appropriate under the circumstances; and
- Award Plaintiff such further relief as this Honorable Court deems necessary and proper.
Dated:
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________________
David Alomatsi
Insert Address
Insert State & ZIP Code
Insert Phone Number
Insert Email
VERIFICATION
I, David Alomatsi, being duly sworn depose and say that I am the Plaintiff in the above entitled action, that I have read the foregoing Motion for Summary Judgment and know the contents thereof. That the same is true of my own knowledge except as to those matters and things stated upon information and belief, and as to those things, I believe them to be true.
_________________________________
(Sign in the presence of a Notary Public)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the _____ day of ____________________, 2021.
______________________________
Notary Public
________________________________________
(Printed name of Notary Public)
My Commission Expires: ____________________
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was sent on the (Date) day of (Month) (Year) by regular U.S. mail, by facsimile, or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following parties or attorneys of record:
Thomas F. McAndrews, Esq. (State Bar No. 120014)
Kevin L. Metros, Esq. (State Bar No. 282460)
REBACK, MCANDREWS, BLESSEY, LLP
1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 450
Manhattan Beach, California 90266
Telephone (310) 297-9900
Facsimile (310) 297-9800
Dated:
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________________
David Alomatsi
Insert Address
Insert State & ZIP Code
Insert Phone Number
Insert Email
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )