McCormick-Gordon v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center RB
McCormick-Gordon v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center RB
McCormick-Gordon v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center RB
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />
Page<br />
INTRODUCTION<br />
STATE:MENT OF FACTS<br />
1<br />
3<br />
A.<br />
B.<br />
<strong>Gordon</strong>'s History OfMultiple, Severe Health Problems<br />
Leading Up To His Death.<br />
Trial Court Proceedings.<br />
3<br />
4<br />
I.<br />
2.<br />
<strong>Cedars</strong>-<strong>Sinai</strong>'s summary judgment motion: The<br />
catheter fragment did not cause <strong>Gordon</strong>'s death and<br />
<strong>Cedars</strong>-<strong>Sinai</strong> did not breach the standard ofcare.<br />
Plaintiffs' opposition.<br />
4<br />
5<br />
a.<br />
b.<br />
Evidence regarding Dr. Rifkin's<br />
qualifications.<br />
Evidence regarding <strong>Cedars</strong>-<strong>Sinai</strong>'s liability.<br />
5<br />
6<br />
STANDARD OF REVIEW<br />
ARGU:MENT<br />
The trial court rules that Dr. Rifkin is not qualified<br />
and has no reasonable basis for his conclusions.<br />
7<br />
7<br />
10<br />
I. THE TRIAL COURT DID NOT ABUSE ITS DISCRETION IN<br />
RULING THAT DR. RIFKIN WAS NOT QUALIFIED. 10<br />
A.<br />
B.<br />
Dr. Rifkin Had No Education, Training, Or Experience In<br />
Urology, Catheter Removal Or Infectious Diseases.<br />
Dr. Rifkin's General <strong>Medical</strong> Knowledge And Unrelated<br />
Work Experience Were Not Sufficient To Establish His<br />
Qualification To Opine On The Specialized Issues Present<br />
Here.<br />
11<br />
13<br />
1