Pulliam

Pulliam v. University of Southern California CA2/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 23, 2022B304749California4,385 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

I. Facts2

A. Pulliam’s employment by MSS Nurses Registry; assignment to USC Verdugo Hills Hospital Pulliam was employed as a nurse by MSS Nurses Registry (MSS), which sent her to work at various hospitals. In October 2015, MSS assigned Pulliam to work at USC Verdugo Hills Hospital (the hospital) on an as-needed basis. Between October 2015 and January 2016, Pulliam worked approximately 40 shifts at the hospital. B. Missing medication In January 2016, a routine weekly medication audit at the hospital revealed that a tablet of tramadol, a controlled pain medication, was missing from a Pyxis machine, a secured unit containing medications. Pyxis records indicated that Pulliam was potentially involved in the medication discrepancy.

USC was sued erroneously as USC Verdugo Hills Hospital. As Pulliam does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence, we state the underlying facts adduced at trial only briefly in the light most favorable to the judgment. (See People v. Camacho (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 1269, 1272, fn. 2.)

2 The hospital’s clinical director, Raffi Boghossian (Boghossian), called MSS to speak with Pulliam about the discrepancy. Boghossian left a…

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.