Braslow

Williams v. Braslow

Good Law
179 Cal. App. 3d 762·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 1433·224 Cal. Rptr. 895
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 2, 1986E001791California4,763 words

Opinion

Opinion

McDANIEL, J.

The appeal here is from a summary judgment entered in favor of defendant County of Riverside (defendant county), owner and operator of the Riverside County General Hospital. The judgment dismissed plaintiff’s action, as to defendant county, brought for her personal injuries resulting from medical malpractice allegedly committed by various persons also alleged to have been employees of defendant county.

One of the theories upon which the motion was pursued, one which proved to be decisive, was that whereas the proposed claim, prepared on plaintiff’s behalf pursuant to the Tort Claims Act, designated Dr. Braslow as “the public employee causing the claimant’s injury,” the undisputed fact was that Dr. Braslow had never been an employee of defendant county.

Apparently relying on this pivotal showing, the trial court granted the motion, there being no issue of fact on this point which provided the defendant county, according to its argument, a complete defense to plaintiff’s action, based as it was on a respondeat superior theory. However, the de limiting rule, relied upon by the court, is subject to a saving exception which it did not take into account. Accordingly, the…

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.