Griffin vs. Back Bay Wellness
Case Information
Motion(s)
Demurrer to Complaint
Motion Type Tags
Demurrer
Parties
- Plaintiff: Griffin
- Defendant: Rick Belling, DC
- Defendant: Back Bay Wellness
Ruling
Defendants Rick Belling, DC and Back Bay Wellness’s Demurrer to the Complaint is SUSTAINED.
Defendants’ demur to the second cause of action for medical battery.
Second Cause of Action – Medical Battery
A battery is any intentional, unlawful and harmful contact by one person with the person of another. The contact is unlawful for purposes of battery if it was not consented to. Thus, where a doctor obtains consent of the patient to perform one type of treatment and subsequently performs a substantially different treatment for which consent was not obtained, there is a clear case of battery.” (Daley v. Regents of Univ. of California (2019) 39 Cal.App.5th 595, 602 (citations and quote marks omitted).
“[W]hen a physician performs the treatment for which consent was obtained and an infrequent complication occurs that the physician failed to disclose when obtaining the patient’s consent. In that circumstance, the claim is based on professional negligence, not intentional misconduct, because the physician did not deliberately deviate from the consent, but merely failed to disclose all known potential complications.” (Burchell v. Fac. Physicians & Surgeons of Loma Linda Univ. Sch. of Med. (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 515, 524.)
Here, Plaintiff does not claim that she consented to one type of medical procedure and that Defendants performed a completely different procedure. Instead, Plaintiff merely asserts that she presented to the office of Defendants on July 9, 2024, and that excessive force was utilized by Dr. Belling during the course of chiropractic manipulations, causing physical injuries. Although Plaintiff asserts she did not consent to “such violent chiropractic manipulation,” she does not assert she consented to one procedure but another one was performed. (Complaint, ¶ 14.) The Complaint alleges she presented to Defendant for the purpose of performing “chiropractic manipulation.” (Complaint, ¶ 7.) Dr. Belling’s alleged “violent chiropractic” manipulation, without more, sounds more in medical negligence than an intentional tort.
Accordingly, the demurrer to the second cause of action is SUSTAINED with leave to amend.
Plaintiff has 15 days leave to amend.