Cortez

Cortez v. Kenneally

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 322·44 Cal. App. 4th 523·51 Cal. Rptr. 2d 671·96 Daily Journal DAR 4061·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2606
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 9, 1996B075702California2,642 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

Introduction

Purportedly pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, the trial court made orders enforcing against defendant and appellant Sharon Kenneally a previous settlement agreement of a medical malpractice action brought by plaintiffs and respondents Miguel Cortez and Graciela de Cortez and the estate of Liliana Cortez, involving alleged malpractice of appellant’s husband, Leo F. Kenneally, M.D. The orders must be reversed, because appellant did not personally participate in the settlement agreement or personally agree to be obligated by it. Under Levy v. Superior Court (1995) 10 Cal.4th 578 [ 41 Cal.Rptr.2d 878 , 896 P.2d 171 ], the section 664.6 procedure can be used only against a party who personally agreed to the settlement.

Factual and Procedural Background

On September 18, 1987, respondents filed a medical malpractice/wrongful death lawsuit against Leo F. Kenneally, M.D., Leo F. Kenneally, M.D., Inc., a professional corporation, Her Medical Clinic, Mediken Management Corporation, and Does 1 through 100. The complaint alleged that on September 20, 1986, decedent Liliana Cortez, while undergoing a therapeutic abortion by Dr. Kenneally, suffered…

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.