Gutierrez v. Tostado
S283128
| Cal. | Jul 31, 2025Background
- Francisco Gutierrez was rear-ended by an ambulance operated by EMT Uriel Tostado and ProTransport-1, LLC while driving on a California highway in January 2018.
- Gutierrez sued Tostado and ProTransport-1 in general negligence for personal injuries and property damage, filing within two years of the accident.
- Defendants argued the claim was time-barred under MICRA's (Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act) one-year statute of limitations for professional negligence.
- The trial court agreed with defendants, granting summary judgment on the basis that the EMT was providing professional services during the incident.
- The Court of Appeal affirmed, but there was a dissent arguing MICRA did not cover routine traffic accidents; the California Supreme Court then granted review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does MICRA's statute of limitations apply? | Claim is general negligence, not professional negligence, so 2-year statute applies | EMT was rendering professional services, so MICRA's 1-year statute applies | No; MICRA only applies to breach of professional obligations to patients, not general negligence |
| Definition of "professional negligence" under MICRA | Only applies to acts integrally related to medical care of a patient | Includes any act by a licensed provider during professional service | MICRA requires an injury proximately caused by breach of a professional obligation, not general duty to public |
| Application to non-patient third parties | Duty at issue was to public as motorists, not to a patient | Plaintiff’s injuries occurred during provision of medical services | Duty breached was ordinary care owed to all, so general negligence statute applies |
| Effect on similar past cases (precedent) | Canister and Lopez wrongly expanded MICRA's reach | Past precedent supports broad reading of MICRA | Court disapproves those cases as inconsistent with its interpretation |
Key Cases Cited
- Flores v. Presbyterian Intercommunity Hospital, 63 Cal.4th 75 (Cal. 2016) (Clarified that MICRA’s statute of limitations applies only to claims arising from breach of professional obligations in providing medical care)
- Hedlund v. Superior Court, 34 Cal.3d 695 (Cal. 1983) (Professional negligence applies when duty breached is integrally connected to provision of professional medical services)
- Delaney v. Baker, 20 Cal.4th 23 (Cal. 1999) (Discussed scope of causes of action and remedies covered by MICRA)
- Norgart v. Upjohn Co., 21 Cal.4th 383 (Cal. 1999) (Describes general purposes of statutes of limitations in civil actions)