McOwen

McOwen v. Grossman

Good Law
153 Cal. App. 4th 937·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1228·63 Cal. Rptr. 3d 615
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 26, 2007B190681California3,771 words

Opinion

Opinion

Flier, J.

Appellant Kevin McOwen filed a medical malpractice action on March 25, 2004, against Caremore Medical Group, Peggy Salazar (not parties to this appeal) and a number of Doe defendants. On August 8, 2005, appellant amended his complaint by substituting respondent Marc Grossman, M.D., for one of the Does. The trial court granted respondent’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that, as to respondent, the statute of limitations barred the action. We conclude that the trial court erred in ruling that the statute of limitations bars the action and reverse the judgment.

FACTS

The operative facts are not disputed, unless otherwise noted.

Appellant stepped on a nail on February 1, 2003. He first received medical care for this injury on February 3, 2003, from Peggy Salazar, a nurse with Caremore, who was treating appellant’s diabetes. Salazar continued to treat the foot by applying ointment. This proved inadequate and appellant was referred to respondent, who is a vascular surgeon, on March 20, 2003, with what appellant characterizes as a “raging infection” of his foot.

Appellant was referred to respondent for evaluation of “an infected sinus of the right fifth…

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.