York Healthcare & Wellness Ctr. LP v. State Dep't of Pub. Health

Good Law
244 Cal. Rptr. 3d 861·33 Cal. App. Supp. 5th 20
Superior Court of CaliforniaMarch 8, 2019No. BV 032739California4,292 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Ricciardulli, J.

INTRODUCTION

York Healthcare & Wellness Centre LP, dba York Healthcare & Wellness Centre *863 (York) was given a $20,000 citation by the State Department of Public Health (the Department) for failing to properly care for one of the residents at its nursing care facility, and it appealed by bringing a limited civil action under Health and Safety Code section 1428, subdivision (b) (1428(b)). Because York failed to timely file a case management statement (CMS) within six months of the filing of the Department's answer, the trial court granted the Department's motion to dismiss and entered judgment against York. York appeals the judgment and, as discussed below, we affirm.

The operative statute states, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a licensee prosecuting a judicial appeal shall file and serve a [CMS] pursuant to Rule 212 of the California Rules of Court within six months after the [D]epartment files its answer in the appeal," and provides that, if a timely CMS is not filed, the court must grant the Department's dismissal motion. (1428(b).) As York points out, California Rules of Court, rule 212 was repealed after 1428(b) was enacted. 1 The rules that replaced rule…

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.