Freedman

Freedman v. Superior Court

Good Law
166 Cal. App. 4th 198·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 1349·82 Cal. Rptr. 3d 563
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 22, 2008G040091California3,099 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ikola, J.

Petitioner Alan Marc Freedman, M.D. (hereafter defendant), seeks a writ of mandate ordering the trial court to vacate its order granting real party in interest Steven Charbonneau’s (hereafter plaintiff) motion to amend his medical malpractice complaint to add a punitive damages claim. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 425.13, subd. (a) (section 425.13(a)).) The court excused plaintiff from the statutory deadline requiring him to file his motion no later than nine months before the first scheduled trial date. It did so pursuant to the five-part test set forth in Goodstein v. Superior Court (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 1635 [ 50 Cal.Rptr.2d 459 ] (Goodstein). And the court eliminated any prejudice to defendant by continuing the trial date and extending the discovery cutoff to provide ample opportunity for additional discovery and a summary judgment motion.

Despite this facially reasonable ruling, we are compelled to set the ruling aside in deference to the deadline established by the Legislature. Even if we apply Goodstein here, plaintiff failed to meet two of its prongs. Plaintiff knew sufficient facts to file the motion before the statutory deadline. And to the extent plaintiff desired…

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.