Shugart

Shugart v. Regents of University of California

Good Law
132 Cal. Rptr. 3d 72·199 Cal. App. 4th 499·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1212
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 9, 2011No. B226338California3,588 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Grimes, J.

Plaintiffs Christine and Michael Shugart appeal from the entry of summary judgments in favor of defendants Linda Warren, M.D., and The Regents of the University of California (Regents). We conclude the trial court correctly entered judgment in favor of the Regents because plaintiffs’ opposition papers failed to raise a triable issue of fact, and we therefore affirm as to the Regents. However, we reverse the summary judgment in favor of Dr. Warren, finding plaintiffs’ expert declaration was admissible and raised triable issues as to Dr. Warren’s alleged medical negligence.

FACTS

Christine Shugart (hereafter Christine) 1 first visited Dr. Warren, a gynecologist, in June 2007 as a new patient. Christine was 48 years old at the time. She advised Dr. Warren she suffered from urinary incontinence and had to manually manipulate her perineum in order to defecate, symptoms she had had for a couple of years. Christine had previously had a hysterectomy and also sought a renewal of her hormone prescription. Dr. Warren took a history from Christine, performed an examination and Pap test, and diagnosed Christine as having stress urinary incontinence and other problems.

Dr. Warren…

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.