2011-00115015-CU-MM

Hailey Whelan vs. Dignity Health

Nature of Proceeding:   Motion to Deem Matters Admitted (Joinder by Folsom Obstetrics)

Filed By:  Keene, Katherine P.

The motion of Defendant Catholic Healthcare West d/b/a Mercy Hospital of Folsom
(“Mercy Hospital”) to dismiss the action, in which Co-Defendants Folsom Obstetrics &
Gynecology Medical Group, Inc., and Jeffrey R. Cragun, M.D. join, is UNOPPOSED
and GRANTED.

Mercy Hospital’s alternative motion for an order deeming admitted certain requests for
admissions is DROPPED as moot.

This medical malpractice action commenced in December 2011.  Former Plaintiff
Hailey Rose-Nichele Whelan (the “Minor”) and Plaintiff Kaela Staton (“Staton”), who is
the Minor’s mother, pleaded causes of action for medical malpractice associated with
Staton’s pregnancy and delivery of the Minor.  Both Staton and the Minor’s father
further pleaded causes of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress.  The
Minor’s causes of action and the father’s cause of action have been dismissed.  Thus,
only Staton’s causes of action remain.

Station is now litigating in propria persona.  However, she cannot be located.  Staton
has not discharged her duty to apprise the court and Defendants of any changes in her
service address.  Defendants’ various papers meant for delivery to Staton have been
returned as undeliverable, and defense counsel’s efforts to communicate with Staton
have been unavailing.  Because Defendants are unable to locate or serve Staton, they
are unable to take her oral deposition or serve her with notices associated with
subpoenas for her medical records.  Moreover, Staton has not participated in the case
management process as directed.  In order to obtain a hearing on the instant motion,
Defendants served the Sacramento County Superior Court Clerk as Staton’s proxy
pursuant to CCP § 1101 and CRC 3.252.               Under the circumstances, the court finds that Staton has failed to submit to discovery
and that she has abandoned the prosecution of her action.  As a consequence, the
court concludes that terminating sanction is appropriate, that Staton’s causes of action
in the operative first amended complaint should be stricken, and that a judgment of
dismissal should be entered in Defendants’ favor.  (See CCP §§ 2023.010, 2023.030
(d).

The court will sign the formal order submitted.  Defendants are directed to lodge for the
court’s signature a judgment of dismissal.