Lattimore v. Dickey, 239 Cal. App. 4th 959

Albert Lattimore received hospital care at Salinas Valley Memorial on Jan 21–24, 2011 for GI bleeding and anemia related to leukemia.
Yvonne Lattimore, acting under a durable power of attorney, authorized procedures including endoscopies and informed consent for Albert's care.
Dr. Dickey initially considered surgery but canceled it in favor of diagnostic CT angiography; later Dr. Dickey and Dr. Carlson performed additional endoscopies.
Albert deteriorated with retroperitoneal hematoma and multiple cardiac arrests; he died on Jan 24, 2011 while in intensive care.
Yvonne filed a single wrongful death claim alleging medical negligence by Dickey, Carlson, and Salinas Valley; the trial court granted summary judgment for all three.
On appeal, the court held issues of standard of care for physicians could be triable but Salinas Valley’s standard of care and causation grounds could be resolved differently.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Competence of plaintiff expert on standard of care	Turner is qualified to opine on standard of care for treating internal bleeding.	Turner lacks specialty credentials to testify on gastroenterology/general surgery standards.	Turner competent; raises triable issue on physicians' standard of care.
Breach of standard of care by Dickey and Carlson	Turner's testimony shows deviations from standard of care.	Experts show compliance with standard of care; no triable issue.	Carlson's standard-of-care issue disputed; reversible on Carlson; Turner creates triable issue for Dickey and Carlson.
Causation supporting Dickey's liability	Timely intervention would have given Albert a chance of survival.	No reasonable medical probability that intervention would have changed outcome.	Dickey entitled to summary judgment on causation grounds.
Salinas Valley’s standard of care	Nursing care fell short of standard under similar circumstances.	Nurses complied with standard of care; expert lacks nursing specialization.	Salinas Valley properly granted summary judgment; no triable issue on nursing standard.
Effect of August 2012 deemed admissions against Dickey	Admissions should not preclude expert challenges.	Deemed admissions establish Dr. Dickey met the standard of care.	Deemed admissions support granting Dickey's motion; Carlson reversed due to remaining issues.

Landeros v. Flood, 17 Cal.3d 399 (Cal. Supreme 1976) (standard of care requires expert testimony except when common knowledge applies)
Flowers v. Torrance Memorial Hospital Medical Center, 8 Cal.4th 992 (Cal. Supreme 1994) (common knowledge exception to expert proof for malpractice)
Carmichael v. Reitz, 17 Cal.App.3d 958 (Cal. App. Dist. 3 1971) (specialists must meet standard of care of their field)
Alef v. Alta Bates Hospital, 5 Cal.App.4th 208 (Cal. App. Dist. 1 1992) (nurse standard of care measured by comparable nurses)
Massey v. Mercy Medical Center Redding, 180 Cal.App.4th 690 (Cal. App. 3 Dist. 2009) (expert testimony required to prove nurse negligence)
Kelley v. Trunk, 66 Cal.App.4th 519 (Cal. App. Dist. 2 1998) (expert proof required for professional negligence standard)
Jones v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., 163 Cal.App.3d 396 (Cal. App. 4th 1985) (causation must be proven to a reasonable medical probability)
Johnson v. Superior Court, 143 Cal.App.4th 297 (Cal. App. 4th 2006) (elements of medical malpractice include duty, breach, causation, damages)
Yanowitz v. L’Oréal USA, Inc., 36 Cal.4th 1028 (Cal. Supreme 2005) (summary judgment standard—liberal construction for opposing party)
Wilcox v. Birtwhistle, 21 Cal.4th 973 (Cal. Supreme 1999) (deemed admissions and discovery sanctions considerations)