2017-00220024-CU-MM

William James Arnold vs. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals

Nature of Proceeding: Hearing on Demurrer

Filed By: Bocker, Karen A.

Defendant Windsor El Camino Care Center, LLC dba Windsor El Camino Care Center’s (“Defendant”) Demurrer to the First, Second, and Third Causes of Action in Plaintiff William James Arnold’s (“Plaintiff”) Complaint is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.

This is an elder abuse action. In his Complaint for Damages (“Complaint”), Plaintiff alleges that he fell down in his home, was taken by ambulance to “the Defendants,” and that during his stays at various hospital- and skilled nursing-facilities, he developed multiple pressure ulcers, infections, and experienced malnourishment and dehydration arising from the acts and omissions of various “Defendants,” including but not limited to the Defendant demurring here. The demurring Defendant was substituted in as “Doe 1” on November 2, 2017.

Defendant demurs to the First, Second, and Third causes of action on grounds of uncertainty, arguing that the Complaint’s approach of lumping all Defendants together and alleging all facts against all Defendants fails to give each Defendant full and fair notice of the claims and allegations against that Defendant specifically. Defendant argues:

Compounding the vagueness of the Complaint, at Paragraph 21 of the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges he “fell at home and was taken by ambulance to the DEFENDANTS.” Given that each defendant is a separate entity, for six out of the seven defendants, this is a factual impossibility and therefore a false claim. Plaintiff alleges that while under the care of DEFENDANTS, he developed multiple pressure ulcers, infections and malnourishment and dehydration. This alone is not sufficient pleading to support a cause of action against this Defendant. Defendant is entitled to know when Plaintiff claims he was at its facility, the location of the pressure ulcers allegedly developed while at this Defendant’s facility, what infections Plaintiff developed at this Defendant’s facility and whether Plaintiff was properly nourished and hydrated immediately prior to his admission to this Defendant’s facility.

(P&As at 4.)

Defendant also contends that the allegations are insufficient to state the First Cause of Action for elder abuse because they fail to identify the specific reckless conduct that caused Plaintiff’s injuries. “[T]he facts constituting the neglect and establishing the causal link between the neglect and the injury ‘must be pleaded with particularity,’ in accordance with the pleading rules governing statutory claims.” (Carter v. Prime Healthcare Paradise Valley, LLC (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 396, 407 (quoting Covenant Care v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 771, 790.)

The Court agrees with Defendant. The First Cause of Action for Elder Abuse is deficiently alleged given the specificity required under Carter and Covenant Care, and also on grounds of uncertainty given the pleading’s repeated references to all “Defendants” lumped together. The Second Cause of Action for Negligence and the Third Cause of Action for Violation of Resident’s Rights are uncertain for this same

reason; the pleading makes no attempt to levy allegations on a defendant-by-defendant basis and instead conclusorily asserts all allegations against all “Defendants” writ large. The particular facts of this case involve Plaintiff’s being transported somewhere via ambulance on April 1, 2017 (with no discharge date alleged) and then receiving treatment at different facilities, all of which must necessarily have occurred on different dates and times: Plaintiff cannot have been in an ambulance and multiple facilities at once. The demurring Defendant is entitled to know which factual allegations bear on its own particular defense. Plaintiff must what injuries he alleges as against each Defendant.

On grounds of the uncertainty arising from all Defendants being lumped together throughout the pleading, Defendant’s demurrer to the First, Second and Third causes of action are SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiff shall amend the pleading so that, where possible, the factual allegations are targeted at the appropriate Defendant(s), rather than the current pleading’s approach of having all allegations targeted at all defendants.

Where leave to amend was granted, Plaintiff shall file and serve a First Amended Complaint on or before January 19, 2018. Responses to the amended pleading shall be filed and served 10 days thereafter, 15 days if served by mail.