Brittany Hernandez vs. Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian

Opposition

Cal. Super. - 4th Dist.September 9, 2016

- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 B 13 LHL 2353 © Eds 2 “2 - 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 €9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER RICHARD A. COHN, ESQ. (SBN # 145156) AITKEN 4+ AITKEN 4+ COHN 3 MACARTHUR PLACE, SUITE 800 SANTA ANA, CA 92707-2555 (714) 434-1424 Telephone (714) 434-3600 Facsimile Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Brittany Hernandez and Rene Calderon, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE- CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER Case No. 30-2016-00874030 Assigned for all Purposes to Honorable Martha K. Gooding Dept. C/34 BRITTANY HERNANDEZ, an individual; RENE CALDERON, an individual Plaintiffs PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO ) ) ) ) ) ) Vs. ) DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL ) HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL SEPARATE STATEMENT IN PRESBYTERIAN; RICHARD C. AGNEW, M.D.; ) SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARENCE P. SINKHORN, M.D.; MAGELLA ~~) CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. MEDICAL GROUP, INC. and DOES 1 TO 100, ) AND MAGELLA MEDICAL INCLUSIVE ) GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR ) SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants. ) DATE: December 18,2017 y TIME: 1:30 pm ) DEPT: C-34 ) ) ) ) Plaintiff hereby responds and opposes defendant, Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian’s Separate Statement as follows: 111 1 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT A I T K E N + 4 A I T K E N 4 C O H N 3 M A C A R T H U R P L A C E , SU IT E 80 0 OO 0 3 OO Wn BA W N E e e e AA Wn AA L O N D = OO 71 4- 43 4- 14 24 71 4- 43 4- 36 00 F A C S I M I L E S A N T A A N A , C A 92 70 7 N o n o N o No N o N o N o No - -_- -_ - ~~ AN Wh Na N Ww No - oS Ne ) o o Eu €9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE 1. On September 11, 2015, the patient Brittany Hernandez presented to Hoag Memorial Hospital, and was admitted for fetal diagnostics for induction. The records reflect that she reported good fetal movement, and denied other problems during her pregnancy. Her admitting physician was Richard Agnew, M.D. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants, Clarence P. Sinkhorn, M.D. and Magella Medical Group, Inc.’s (“codefendants”) motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 281 and 704; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., 9 5(a) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 1. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 2. The records reflect that the patient was monitored throughout the day and night on September 11, 2015, and throughout the morning of September 12, 2015. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected 2. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 2 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1 || MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED | OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING | SUPPORTING EVIDENCE 2 ||| EVIDENCE: 3 Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 326-327 4 and 333; Evidence in Support, Exhibit “D”; 5 Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., 6 || 5(b) in support of codefendants’ Motion for 7 || Summary Judgment. 8 11] 3. The records reflect that at or around 3. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant 9 7:44 a.m. on September 12, 2015, the fetus motion only. 10 ||| was moving. 1 Evidence in Support 12 111 Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support % 13 ll of codefendants’ motion for the Selected GE. = J 5 [| 3 a5 S 14 | Medical Records from Hoag at p. 336; Wop Z20O = - Bu 5(c) in support of codefendants’ Motion for 922 1 17 5 3 a g Summary Judgment. = 18 ” 4. It was charted that at or around 8:00 4. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant 19 a.m. on September 12, 2015, Dr. Agnew was | motion only. 20 » at the patient’s at bedside. Dr. Agnew 59 assessed the patient and reviewed the fetal 23 monitoring strip. It is noted that Pitocin had 24 been restarted at 7:30 a.m. Dr. Agnew 75 performed a pelvic exam, and noted that the 26 ||| patient was dilated 9.0 cm. It was noted that 27 ||| there were no baseline changes in the fetal &» PRINTED ON o 3 RECHOLED PAPER PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT A I T K E N +4 A I T K E N 4 C O H N 3 M A C A R T H U R P L A C E , SU IT E 80 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 71 4- 43 4- 14 24 71 4- 43 4- 36 00 FA CS IM IL E S A N T A AN A, CA 92 70 7 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ~a €9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE heart rate. It was noted that variability was moderate, and there were variable decelerations. It was charted that Pitocin was increased. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 336-337; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., 5(d) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 5. The medical records reflect that at or around 8:35 a.m. on September 12, 2015, it was charted that there were “late; variable” decelerations. It was described in the medical chart as “deceleration of FHR 70 sections and then returned to baseline.” At or around 8:43 a.m., the fetal heart rate responded to scalp stimulation. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at p. 339; 5. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 4 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 13 Es 3 hE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 OPRINTEDON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., 5(e) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 6. The medical chart documents that at or around 9:30 a.m. on September 12, 2015, there was a deceleration in the fetal heart rate to 85 beats per minute for 80 seconds and then a return to baseline. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at p. 341-342 and 490; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 5(f) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 6. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 7. The medical records reflect that at or around 9:35 a.m. on September 12, 2015, a call was placed to Dr. Agnew and a message was left to call back because the patient was having decelerations in the fetal heart rate. A call was then placed to OB/GYN Dr. Sinkhorn to come to the labor room and assess the fetal heart rate tracing. Dr. Sinkhorn documented that he received this 7. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 5 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 g 13 iE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 26 27 2) 9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE call at or around 9:38 a.m. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at p. 341-342 and 490; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 5(g) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 8. The records reflect that by 9:39 a.m. on September 12, 2015, Dr. Sinkhorn was at the patient’s bedside. The medical records reflect that this was the first time Dr. Sinkhorn saw this patient during this admission. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at p. 341-342 and 490; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 5(h) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 8. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 9, The records reflect that Dr. Sinkhorn assessed the fetal monitoring strip and performed a vaginal exam while the fetal 9. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 6 PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT A I T K E N +4 A I T K E N 4 C O H N 3 M A C A R T H U R P L A C E , SU IT E 80 0 OS OVO XX 9 O N wn pA W N -_ = = e e e e aA wn A W N 71 4- 43 4- 14 24 71 4- 43 4- 36 00 F A C S I M I L E S A N T A A N A , C A 92 70 7 Do No No No No \) ND - - -_ aN Wn Ea Ww No - = O co ~ No ~ ~a <9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY'S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE heart rate was at 72 beats per minute. He asked the patient to push once with contraction. Dr. Sinkhorn also noted that there was a reducible rim at +1, but bradycardia persisted. It was noted that there was a deceleration in the fetal heart rate to 70- 80 beats per minute for 70 seconds. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at p. 341-342, 476-477, and 490; Declaration of Stephen A. 9 5G) in Motion of Hebert, M.D. support for codefendants’ Summary Judgment. 10. The medical chart reflects that at or around 9:39 a.m. on September 12, 2015, the fetal heart rate dropped to 60 beats per minute, absent variability. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at p. 341-342; 10. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. ” PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 x 13 Es 3 Ep “2 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 £9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., 5(j) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 11. The records reflect that at or around 9:40 a.m. on September 12, 2015, the fetal heart tracings remained at 60 beats per minute. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at p. 341-342; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., 5(k) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 11. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 12. The records reflect that at or around 9:41 a.m. on September 12, 2015, Dr. Sinkhorn called for an emergency Cesarean section. The decision was made to transfer the patient to the Operating Room. Dr. Sinkhorn asked that Dr. Agnew and any available obstetrician be called as well. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected 12. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 8 PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT A I T K E N 4 A I T K E N 4 C O H N 3 M A C A R T H U R P L A C E , SU IT E 80 0 OS OO 0 NN O N n n B A W = -_ = = = = = AA Wn Ar WL ND = 71 4- 43 4- 14 24 71 4- 43 4- 36 00 F A C S I M I L E S A N T A AN A, CA 92 70 7 Do No No No ND \) ND - - - aN Wn E e w No - = Oo oo ] 3 No ~~ £9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Medical Records from Hoag at p. 341-342 and 490; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 5(1) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 13. At approximately 9:44 a.m. on September 12, 2015, the patient was in the Operating Room and attached to a fetal monitor. It was documented in the medical chart that the fetal heart tracings were noted to be 50 beats per minute. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants” motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 266, 341- 342, 476-477, and 490; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 5(m) in support of Motion for codefendants’ Summary Judgment. 13. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 14. The records reflect that the anesthesiologist arrived almost immediately after the patient was brought to the Operating Room. The epidural was noted to be inadequate for the patient’s surgery, so she was intubated and put to sleep via general 14. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 9 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT p - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 g 13 $s 8 $2233 16 hE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ~~ €9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE anesthesia. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 266, 341- 342, 476-477, 490, and 493; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., q 5(n) in support of Motion for ~~ Summary codefendants’ Judgment. 15. While Dr. Sinkhorn a draping the patient for the procedure, Dr. Agnew arrived in the operating room. Dr. Agnew was the primary surgeon for the patient’s C-section, and Dr. Sinkhorn was listed as the assistant surgeon. According to the intraoperative record, a skin incision was made at or around 9:52 a.m. According to Dr. Sinkhorn’s progress note, the skin incision was made at 9:51 a.m. per the wall clock. A rapid Cesarean section was performed, and the infant was delivered at or around 9:54 a.m. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected 15. Undisputed for the purposes of the instant motion only. 10 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - _ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 12 g 13 FHL3B 5 g4Y=z= F2215 10 “E 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 €9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 266, 341- 342, 426, 476-477, and 490; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., 9 5(0) in support of Summary codefendants’ Motion for Judgment. 16. The medical records reflect that the infant was limp and apneic after delivery. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 264-265 and 493; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 5(o) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 16. Disputed. Per the Declaration of plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., attached, it is not possible to know if the infant was stillborn or died just after delivery. (See Declaration of plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., at §10.) 17. The records reflect that the infant made no spontaneous movements and no response to pain or procedures for 10 minutes. The infant’s Apgar scores were 0/0/0 at 1, 5, and 10 minutes. His heart rate was 0 beats per minute. Infant complications were noted to include decreased variability, extended fetal bradycardia, multiple variable decelerations, meconium and polyhydramnios. 17. Disputed. Per the Declaration of plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., attached, it is not possible to know if the infant was stillborn or died just after delivery. (See Declaration of plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., at §10.) 11 PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT A I T K E N <4 A I T K E N 4 C O H N 3 M A C A R T H U R P L A C E , SU IT E 80 0 O O 0 9 O N nn BA A L N -_- = = e e e e e a A A Wn A W N = OO 71 4- 43 4- 14 24 71 4- 43 4- 36 00 F A C S I M I L E SA NT A AN A, CA 92 70 7 N N N N N N ND = m m aA BA O W N = SS © ow No ~J £9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 264-265 and 493; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 5(p) in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 18. The neonatologist and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (“NICU”) team immediately took over care of the infant. He was immediately intubated and meconium suctioned. Evidence in Support Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 264-265, Declaration of 476-477, 490, and 493; Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 5(q) in support of 18. Disputed. Per the Declaration of plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., attached, it is not possible to know if the infant was stillborn or died just after delivery. (See Declaration of plaintiff's expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., at 10.) codefendants’ Motion ~~ for ~~ Summary Judgment. 19; The records reflect that the infant was | 19. Disputed. Per the Declaration of stillborn. Resuscitation began at 9:54 a.m. and ended at 10:08 a.m. The patient declined an autopsy. plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., attached, it is not possible to know if the infant was stillborn or died just after 12 PLAINTIFE’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT A I T K E N A I T K E N 4 C O H N 3 M A C A R T H U R P L A C E , SU IT E 80 0 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 71 4- 43 4- 14 24 71 4- 43 4- 36 00 F A C S I M I L E 17 18 19 S A N T A AN A, CA 92 70 7 20 21 22 23 24 23 26 27 £9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED | OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING | SUPPORTING EVIDENCE EVIDENCE: Evidence in Support delivery. (See Declaration of plaintiff’s Exhibit “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 264-265, 453, and 495; Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 5(q) in support of codefendants’ Motion for ~~ Summary Judgment. expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., at 410.) 20. The fetus’s death was reported to the Orange County Coroner’s Office as a fetal death, and the time of death was noted to be 9:54 am. Evidence in Support Exhibit “E” attached to Evidence in Support motion for the Selected of codefendants’ Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 7-9. 20. Disputed. Per the Declaration of plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., attached, it is not possible to know if the infant was stillborn or died just after delivery. (See Declaration of plaintiffs expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., at §10.) 21. Stephen A. Hebert, M.D. is a physician licensed to practice medicine in the State of California, and is board certified by the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Supporting Evidence Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D, § 1 in support of codefendants’ Motion for 21. Disputed. Per the Declaration of plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., attached, it is not possible to know if the infant was stillborn or died just after delivery. (See Declaration of plaintiff's expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., at 10.) 13 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 g 13 SEs 8 yy $a%af 15 hE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 BPavmoon RECYCLED PAPER MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED | OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING | SUPPORTING EVIDENCE EVIDENCE: Summary Judgment. 22. The fetus was born deceased and was 22. Disputed. Per the Declaration of never alive after birth. The fetus was stillborn on September 12, 2015. Supporting Evidence Declaration of Stephen A. Hebert, M.D., § 13 in support of codefendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment; Exhibits “C” attached to Evidence in Support of codefendants’ motion for the Selected Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 264-265, 453, 476-477, 493, and 495; Exhibit “E” attached to Evidence in Support motion for the Selected of codefendants’ Medical Records from Hoag at pp. 7-9. plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., attached, it is not possible to know if the infant was stillborn or died just after delivery. (See Declaration of plaintiff’s expert, Howard Mandel, M.D., at §10.) Dated: November _, 2017 14 AITKEN + AITK By: RICHARP ACCONNESQ. | Attorneys-for Plaintiff PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT A I T K E N 4 A I T K E N 4 C O H N 3 M A C A R T H U R P L A C E , SU IT E 80 0 OO 0 N39 OO hn BA W N = -_ - = e e = e m e e AN nn BA WLW ND = Oo 71 4- 43 4- 14 24 71 4- 43 4- 36 00 F A C S I M I L E S A N T A AN A, CA 92 70 7 DO No No No No No No - - -_ aN wn E N w No - oS Oo 0 ~ NS ~~ 28 €9 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 800, Santa Ana, California, 92707. On November , 2017, I served the foregoing documents described as PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN’S SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPPORT OF ITS JOINDER TO CLARANCE P. SINKHORN, M.D. AND MAGELLA MEDICAL GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT the parties herein in this action by placing ( ) the original (x) a true copy thereof in a sealed envelope addressed as indicated on the attached service list. SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST .) BYMAIL ( , Asfollows: Iam "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with U.S. postal service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Santa Ana, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date oF pela meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing an affidavit. ( ) By Personal Service: I caused the above-referenced the document(s) to be delivered by hand to the attached addressees. (0 By Overnight Courier: I caused the above-referenced document(s) to be delivered to an overnight courier service for delivery to the above address(es). ( ) By Facsimile Machine: I caused the above-referenced document(s) to be transmitted to the above-named persons at the following telephone number(s) see attached Proof of Service list. () By Email Transmission: I caused the above-referenced document(s) to be transmitted to the persons listed in the attached Proof of Service lists. Executed on November _, 2017 at Santa Ana, California. (X) (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. AZALYARLINA 1 PROOF OF SERVICE - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 S 13 PIT F EERE “E 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 £2 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER HERNANDEZ vs HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN, et al.,. SERVICE LIST Robert L.. McKenna, ITI Carrie H. Weinstein, Esq. Carroll, Kelly, Trotter, Franzen, McKenna & Peabody PO Box 22636 Long Beach, CA 90801-5636 (562) 432-5855 (562)432-8785-FAX Attorneys for Defendant Magella Medical Group, Inc. and Clarence P. Sinkhorn, M.D. Daniel W. Doyle Doyle Schafer McMahon 5440 Trabuco Road Irvine, CA 92670 (949)727-7-077 (949)727-1284-FAX Attorneys for Defendant Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Stephen Fraser Rachael C. Kogen Fraser Watson Croutch 1100 West Town and Country Road, Ste. 1030 Orange, CA 92868-4687 (714)533-3373 (714) 543-3374-FAX Attorneys for Defendant Richard Agnew, M.D. 2 PROOF OF SERVICE