Staub

Staub v. Kiley CA3

Good Law
173 Cal. Rptr. 3d 104·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 520·226 Cal. App. 4th 1437·2014 WL 2724125
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 20, 2014C071500California3,860 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hull, J.

Plaintiffs George and Julianne Staub appeal pro se from the judgment entered in favor of defendants James M. Kiley (Riley) and the Regents of the University of California (Regents) following defendants’ successful motion for nonsuit.

In this action for medical malpractice, the trial court granted defendants’ in limine motion precluding plaintiffs’ expert witnesses from testifying at trial, on the ground plaintiffs unreasonably failed to timely disclose their designated trial experts after receiving a statutory demand from defendants. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2034.220, 2034.300, 2034.720; unless otherwise stated, statutory references that follow are to the Code of Civil Procedure.) Without designated experts, plaintiffs could not address at trial the element of causation of injury from the alleged medical negligence (see Jennings v. Palomar Pomerado Health Systems, Inc. (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 1108, 1118 [ 8 Cal.Rptr.3d 363 ]) and the trial court found plaintiffs were likewise precluded without designated experts from maintaining their causes of action for lack of informed consent and fraudulent concealment.

On appeal, plaintiffs argue the trial court erred in granting…

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.