Statement Case Management ConferenceCal. Super. - 6th Dist.May 18, 2018ATTORNEY ORPAR1YVBTHOUTATTORNEY(Name, SfafaBarnu be, andaddress) David C. Anderson, Esq. SBN 83146; Andrew W. Ratto, Esq., SBN 314227 Anderson Law 55 Francisco Street, Suite 403, San Francisco, CA 94133 TEIEPHoNENo 415-395-9898 FAN NO.TOPgonar).415-395-9839 E-MldLADDREss fons'al): admin@dcandersonlaw.corn AITCRNEYFoR fName): Plaintiffs Michael Boguslavsky and Marina Malkevich sUPERIQR CQURT QF CALIFQRNIA,coUNTY oF Santa Clara STREETADDRESS: 191 N. First Street LIAILINGADDRESS cITYANDzIPcoDEr San Jose CA 95113 BRANCH NAME: PLAINTIFF/PE1111DNER; Michael Boguslavsky, et al. DEFENDANT)REsPQNDENT: Stanford Health Care, et al. CASE MANAGEMENTSTATEMENT (Check one): IX UNLIMITEDCASE C] LIMITEDCASE (Amount demanded (Amount demanded is $25,000 exceeds $25,000) or less) A CASE MANAGEMENTCONFERENCE is scheduled as follows: FOR COURT USE ONLY CASE NULIBEIB 18CV328592 CM-110 Date: August 28, 2018 Time: 1:30pm Address of court (ifdifferent from the address above): Dept.: 9 Dive Room: Notice of Intent to Appear by Telephone, by (name)l David C. Anderson INSTRUCTIONS: Ail applicable boxes must be checked, and the specified information must be provided. 1. Party or parties (answer one): a. ~Y'his statement is submitted by party (name)f Plaintiffs Michael Boguslavsky and Marina Malkevich b. ~ This statement is submitted jointly by parties (nemes)) 2. Complaint and cross-complaint (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-comp)sinsnis only) a. The complaintwas filed on (date): 5/18118 b. ~ The cross-complaint, if any, was filed on (dete): 3. Service (to be answered by plaintiffs end cross-complainsnts only) a. ~ All parties named in the complaint and cross-complaint have been served, have appeared, or have been dismissed. b. ~ The following parties named in the complaint or cross-complaint (1) ~ have not been served (speci)y names snd exp/ain why not): (2) ~ have been served but have not appeared and have not been dismissed (specify names): Defendant Masha Nakelchik, M.D. (3) ~ have had a default entered against them (specify names): c. ~ The following additional parties may be added (specify names, nature of involvement in case, snd date by which they mey be served): 4. Description of case a. Type of case in ~w complaint H cross-complaint (Describe, including causes of action): Medical Malpractice resulting from Wrongful Death, Lack of Informed Consent, Medical Battery Fom Admted for I r and a 1 my Use Judtolai Counol of Califomla CM-1 10 IRev. Jufy I, 20111 CASE MANAGEMENTSTATEMENT Page I of 5 Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.720-3.730 uv woourts oa go Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 8/9/2018 4:09 PM Reviewed By: A. Rodriguez Case #18CV328592 Envelope: 1819741 18CV328592 Santa Clara - Civil CM-110 t PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER; Michael Boguslavsky, et al. 18CV328592 DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT Stanford Health Care, et al. 4. b. Provide a brief statement of the case, including any damages. (Ifpersonal injury damages are sought, specify the injury and damages claimed, including medical expenses to date (Indicate source and amount), estimated future medical expenses, lost earnings to date, snd estimated future lost earnings. Ifequitable relief is sought, describe the nature of the relief) See attached Addendum 4b. ~v'Ifmore space is needed, check this box and attach a page designated as Attachment 4b.) 5. Jury or nonjury trial The pany or parties request MV a jury trial H a nonjury trial. (Ifmore than one party, provide the name of each party requesting a jury tria/): 6. Trial date a. ~ The trialhas been setfor(date): b. ~~ No trial date has been set. This case will be ready for trial within 12 months of the date of the filing of the complaint (if not, explain): c. Dates on which parties or attorneys will not be available for trial (specify dales and explain reasons for unavailability): 2018 Trials: 11/5; 11/22; 11/26; 12/20. 2019 Trials: 1/4; 1/28; 2/2; 2/22; 4/8-12; 4/26; 7/8; 8/21. 7. Estimated length of trial The parly or parties estimate that the trial will take (check one): a. ~K days (specify number): 7 - 10 b. ~ hours (short causes) (specify)J 8. Trial representation (to be answered for each party) The party or parties will be represented at trial ~ by the attorney or party listed in the caption a. Attorney: b. Firm: c. Address: d. Telephone number: f. Fax number: e. E-mail address; g. Party represented: Additional representation is described in Attachment 8. 9. Preference This case is entitled to preference (spec/fy code section): 10. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) ~ by the following: a. ADR information package. Please note that different ADR processes are available in different courts and communities; read the ADR information package provided by the court under rule 3.221 for information about the processes available through the court and community programs in this case. (1) For parties represented by counsel: Counsel Mv has W has not provided the ADR information package identified in rule 3.221 to the client and reviewed ADR options with the client. (2) For self-represented parties: Party H has C3 has not reviewed the ADR information package identified in rule 3.221. b. Referral to judicial arbitration or civil action mediation (ifavailable). (1) ~ This matter is subject to mandatory judicial arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141,11 or to civil action mediation under Code of Civil Procedure section 1775.3 because the amount in controversy does not exceed the statutory limit. (2) ~ Plaintiff elects to refer this case to judicial arbitration and agrees to limit recovery to the amount specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.11. (3) ~v'his case is exempt from judicial arbitration under rule 3.811 of the California Rules of Court or from civil action mediation under Code of Civil Procedure section 1775 et seq, (specify exemption): Amount in controversy exceeds jurisdictional limits Cu-110 [Rev. July 1, 2011i CASE MANAGEMENTSTATEMENT Page 2 or 5 PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Michael Boguslavsky, et al. EFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Stanford Health Care, et al. ! CASE RUEISER 18CV328592 CM-110 10. c, Indicate the ADR process or processes that the party or parties are willing to participate in, have agreed to participate in, or have already participated in (check all that apply and provide the specified lnlormallon)i The party or parties completing this form are willing to participate in the following ADR processes (check all that apply): If the party or parties completing this form in the case have agreed to participate in or have already completed an ADR process or processes, indicate the status of the processes (atlach a copy of the parties'ADR stipulation): (1) Mediation Mediation session not yet scheduled Mediatian session scheduled for (date): Agreed to complete mediation by (date): Mediation completed on (date): (2) Settlement conference Settlement conference not yet scheduled Settlement conference scheduled for (dale)i Agreed to complete settlement conference by (dste): Settlement conference completed on (date): (3) Neutral evaluation Neutral evaluation not yet scheduled Neutral evaluation scheduled for (date)r Agreed to complete neutral evaluation by (date)r Neutral evaluation completed on (date): (4) Nonbinding judicial arbitration Judicial arbitration not yet scheduled Judicial arbitration scheduled for (date)r Agreed to complete judicial arbitration by (date): Judicial arbitration completed on (date): (5) Binding private arbitration Private arbitration not yet scheduled Private arbitration scheduled for (date)i Agreed to complete private arbitration by (date)r Private arbitration completed on (date): (6) Other (specily): ADR session not yet scheduled ADR session scheduled for (dste): Agreed to complete ADR session by (date): ADR completed on (date): Ct,1-110 [Ray 3 ~ ty I, 201 II CASE MANAGEMENTSTATEMENT Rasa 3 15 t PLAINTIFF/PETITfoNER: Michael Boguslavsky, et al.DEFENDANTIRESPQNOENT: Stanford Health Care, et al. 11.Insurance a. ~ Insurance carrier, if any, for party filing this statement (name)i b. Reservation of rights: H Yes C3 No c. ~ Coverage issues will significantly affect resolution of this case (explain)r CAEE RUVSER 18CV328592 CM-116 12. Jurisdiction Indicate any matters that may affect the court'0 judisdiction or processing of this case and describe the status.~ Bankruptcy C] Other (specify): Status: 13. Related cases, consolidation, and coordination a ~ There are companion, underlying, or related cases. (1) Name of case; (2) Name of court. (3) Case number: (4) Status;~ Additional cases are described in Attachment 13a. b. H A motion to C] consolidate ~ coordinate will be filed by (neme party) 14. Bifurcation~ The party or parties intend to fife a motion for an order bifurcating, severing, or coordinating the following issues or causes of action (specify moving party, type of motion, end reasons): 15. Other motions~ The party or parties expect to file the following motions before trial (specify moving party, type of motion, and issues): 16. Discovery a. ~ The party or parties have completed all discovery. b. ~V The following discovery will be completed by the date specified (describe all anticipated discovery): Party Descriotion Date Plaintiff Written Discovery Nov. 2018 Plaintiff Deposition of Defendants Jan. 2019 Plaintiff Expert Discovery Per Code ~ The following discovery issues, including issues regarding the discovery of electronically stored information, are anticipated (specify)r Ci.i.110 fRev Jete 1, 2011f CASE MANAGEMENTSTATEMENT 0 gegefg PtAINTIFF/PETITIDNER: Michael Bogustavsky, et al. DEFENDANT/REsPQNDENT. Stanford Health Care, et al, CASE NU11SER 18CV328592 CM-110 17. Economic litigation a, ~ This is a limited civil case (i.eo the amount demanded is $25,000 or less) and the economic litigation procedures in Code of Civil Procedure sections 90-98 will apply to this case. b. ~ This is a limited civil case and a motion to withdraw the case from the economic litigation procedures or for additional discovery will be filed (ifchecked, explain specifical/y why economic litigelion procedures relating to discovery or tnal should nol apply to this case): 18. Otherissues~ The party or parties request that the following additional matters be considered or determined at the case management conference (specify): 19. Meet and confer a. ~ The party or parties have met and conferred with all parties on all subjects required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of Court (ifnot, explain): I>. After meeting and conferring as required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of Court, the parties agree on the following (specify)r 20. Total number of pages attached (ifany): 1 I am completely familiar with this case and will be fullyprepared to discuss the status of discovery and alternative dispute resolution, as well as other issues raised by this statement, and will possess the authority to enter into stipulations on these issues at the time of the case management conference, including the written authority of the party where required. Date: August 9, 2018 David C. Anderson, Esq. ITYPE OR PRINT NAJ IEI ISIGNATURE OF PARTY OR hTORNEY) (TYPE OR PRIM NAL1EI (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEYI~ Additional signatures are attached. Cgi-110 [Re Y. July 1, 20 ul CASE MANAGEMENTSTATEMENT Page 5 uf 5 tSHORT TITLE:Boguslavsky v. Stanford Health Care, et al. CASE NUMBER 18CV328592 MC-025 ATTACHMENT(Number)f 4b (This Attachment may be used frith any Judicial Council form) PlaintiffMichael Boguslavsky and Marina Malkevich are husband and daughter, respectfully, of Decedent Ellen Boguslavsky. On 2/20/17, Ellen, then 82 years old, was admitted to Def. Stanford Health Care ("SHC") with a recent diagnosis ofright fiontal benign meningioma. She was evaluated and admitted for right frontal craniotomy for resection of the benign tumor. She ivas in overall good health and asymptomatic other than some recent behavior changes. Surgery was performed by Steven D. Chang, M.D. and anesthesiologist was Karl Zheng, M.D., who are SHC employee physicians. Dr. Nalekchek was Ellen's primary care physician who referred her to SHC for neurological assessment, evaluation, and recommendation. Following the referral, Nakelchik did not follow-up on SHC to leam what the consultation results were. Ellen relied on her to communicate with SHC and its neurologists and determine which treatment course, ifany, was advisable given her health, age, life activities, family, future, and to advise her ivhether to have surgeiy or not. At no time prior to the surgery did Nakelchk communicate with Ellen or her family and this failure was a breach of the standard of care. Ellen developed extensive post-operative bleeding and other complications and on 2/24/17, she was pronounced dead with the primaiy cause being cerebral edema and extensive blood loss post-operatively. Defendants did negligently and carelessly fail to properly render medical treatment to Ellen, and perfoimed surgeiy negligently, failed to properly monitor, supervise, direct, and oversee each physician, physician' assistant, nurse practitioner, nurse, and other attending medical staff responsible for providing competent medical care to Ellen. These acts and omissions ofprofessional medical and nursing duties and obligations constituted medical and nursing negligence and were substantial factors in causing death resulting in Plaintiffs incuning funeral and burial expenses, and have been deprived ofEllen's love, companionship, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, and moral support. Further, Ellen was a Russian immigrant tvho did not speak, understand, or ivrite English or any language other than her native Russian and she did understand the serious risks and complications including death and severe brain damage associated ivith the surgeiy perfoimed. She was not provided with a Russian language written consent, SHC did not provide an interpreter, a medical translator ivas not present at any time, SHC's own policy and protocols for non-English speaking patients was to provide such language services in any and all circumstances involving recommended surgical procedures and administration ofgeneral anesthesia. SHC failed to abide by its own standards and duties as well as the standard of care in the medical community. Any consent by Ellen to the surgeiy ivas conditioned upon the surgeon consulting with Nakelchik concerning the evaluation of the benign cerebral tumor, treatment options, complications, side effects, benefits, risks, and all other appropriate information that supported medical advice that she undergo a known complicated and high-risk brain procedure. At no time did the surgeon obtain nor did Nakelchik have such a communication. Further, certain medical staff at SHC knowingly and falsely reported to Ellen and her daughter that Nakelchik had communicated with the surgeon and approved the surgery. Ellen died following the surgeiy and Defendants'onduct was a substantial factor in causing Ellen's death. (lfthe item that this Atfachment concerns is made under penalty ofperjury, all statements in this Attachment are made under penalty ofpejrury) Page of (Add pages as required) Fo m Approved for CpBonal Uae Jud'dal Counol of Caafornla AlC025 IRev. J uly l, 2005I ATTACHMENT to Judicial Council Form mr wrouanfo, ra 0ov I Boguslavsky v. Stanford, et al. Santa Clara County Case No. 18CV328592 2 3 PROOF OF SERVICE [C.C.P. tj 1013, C.R.C.tj 2008, F.R.C.P. Rule 5) 4 5 I am over the age of eighteen years, not a party to this action and I am employed within the City and County of San Francisco. Mybusiness address is 55 Francisco Street, Suite 403, San Francisco, CA 94133. On the date set forth below, I served document(s) described as: CASK MANAGKMKNTSTATKMKNT ollection and processing ofcorrespondence for maihng with the United States Postal Setvtce, to-wit, that conespondence willbe deposited, postage prepaid, with the United States Postal Service, this same day, within the ordinary course ofbusiness of the law firm. BYPERSONAL SERVICE: I caused such envelope(s) to be delivered by hand this date to the offices of the addressee(s). BYFACSIMILE: I caused said document to be transmitted by facsimile to the number indicated below. Confirmation of transmission is noted on the FAX transmission report retained in the case file. BYELECTRONIC SERVICE: To the addresses listed below. 12 13 14 15 16 9 in the manner indicated below and upon the individuals in the seivice list. 10 X BYFIRST CLASS MAIL: I am readily familiar with my firm's practice for c11 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Carolyn L. Northrop, Esq. Thomas Gray, Esq. DUMMIT,BUCHHOLZk TRAPP 1661 Garden Hwy. Sacramento, CA 95833 Tele: (916) 929-9600 Fax: (916) 927-5368 Attoineys for Stan ford Health Care lennifer Still, Esq. Hinshaw, Marsh, Still Bs Hinshaw, LLP 12901 Saratoga Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Tele: (408) 861-6500 Fax: (408) 257-6645 Attysfor Nakelchik 24 25 I declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws of the State ofCalifornia that the foregoing statements are true and correct and that this Declaration was executed on August 23, 2017, at San Francisco, CA. 27 ALENE WRITTEN PROOF OF SERVICE