Bundren

Bundren v. Superior Court

Good Law
145 Cal. App. 3d 784·193 Cal. Rptr. 671·1983 Cal. App. LEXIS 2011
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 8, 1983Civ. 68237California2,812 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stone, J.

Elaine M. Bundren (hereafter referred to as Petitioner) seeks a writ of mandate to compel the trial court to vacate its order granting partial summary judgment on her cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress against Los Robles Regional Medical Center (hereafter referred to as Los Robles).

A trial court is justified in granting summary judgment only if “the declarations filed in support of it, strictly construed, contain facts sufficient to entitle the hospital to judgment, and those of the plaintiff, liberally construed, show that there was no issue of fact to be tried.” (Stationers Corp. v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. (1965) 62 Cal.2d 412, 417 [ 42 Cal.Rptr. 449 , 398 P.2d 785 ].) Where reasonable parties may differ, the question is for the jury to decide. (Bigbee v. Pacific Tel. & Tel. Co. (1983) 34 Cal.3d 49, 56 [ 192 Cal.Rptr. 857 , 665 P.2d 947 ].) Our review of the record reveals that a triable issue of fact does exist and, therefore, a peremptory writ of mandate will issue.

On February 4, 1981, petitioner filed a complaint against Los Robles seeking actual and punitive damages for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. On…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.