 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Nash v. Mehrtash11/8/2002
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Sharon Toliver and Richard Nash sought to recover from defendants Ata O. Mehrtash, M.D. and Memorial Hospital of Gardena for the wrongful death of their infant child on the theory that a delay in the performance of a caesarean section operation caused their baby to be delivered stillborn. After the close of evidence, the court allowed father Nash to amend his complaint to assert a cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress as a bystander. Dr. Mehrtash appeals from the ensuing judgment against him and in favor of father Nash on the ground, where the death occurred in utero, Nash was not contemporaneously aware that the fetus was suffering injury . In light of the Supreme Court's requirement as stated in Thing v. La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644 (Thing), we conclude Nash had no recognizable theory of recovery. Accordingly, we reverse that part of the judgment entered in favor of father Nash.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Reviewing the evidence according to the usual rules of appellate review (Campbell v. Security Pac. Nat. Bank (1976) 62 Cal.App.3d 379, 384-385), it shows Toliver awoke in the middle of the night with heavy vaginal bleeding and was taken by ambulance to Memorial Hospital of Gardena at 3:53 a.m. At the time, Toliver was eight months pregnant. Nash, the baby's father, followed the ambulance to the hospital.
Soon after her arrival at the hospital, Toliver was transferred to the Labor and Delivery Unit. Toliver was suffering vaginal bleeding and abdominal cramping. She was connected to a fetal heart monitor but there was no fetal heart tone. Such a situation is considered in obstetrics to be a "dire emergency" and so the on-call obstetrician, Dr. Mehrtash, was contacted.
Dr. Mehrtash did not immediately leave for the hospital. He was called four times before he left his home. During one of those calls, Nash pleaded with the doctor to come to the hospital because Toliver was bleeding and in pain. A nurse reminded Dr. Mehrtash to order pain medication for Toliver during the third call. The fourth call was made at 4:30 a.m. by the nursing supervisor. Plaintiffs' expert opined that Dr. Mehrtash should have gotten on the road to the hospital right away, within five minutes of the first call.
Nash testified that he felt fear for his baby and for Toliver while he was waiting for Dr. Mehrtash to arrive at the hospital. Nash testified "we were trying to get a doctor in there because it was like everybody . . . wasn't doing anything. . . . [ ] I kept pleading with him [Dr. Mehrtash] . . . we need him there because she needed medical attention. . . ."
At 4:35 a.m., the fetal heart monitor began to feebly indicate fetal heart tones. Nash understood there was a problem in the beginning, but once the nurses found the fetal heart tones, he was relieved and understood the baby was okay. Nash remained afraid however because Toliver was not being moved to delivery fast enough.
By the time Dr. Mehrtash arrived, Nash understood the baby was okay, but still felt the doctor was not focusing on the baby, which "intensified the fear." Nash was terrified.
By 5:30 a.m., Dr. Mehrtash determined that Toliver was suffering from placental abruption, a separation of the placenta from the uterine wall. That is, al
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|