Padilla v. HealthSouth Bakersfield Rehabilitation Hospital CA5

Filed 6/23/14 Padilla v. HealthSouth Bakersfield Rehabilitation Hospital CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

LARRY L. PADILLA, F067576 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. CV276611) v.

HEALTHSOUTH BAKERSFIELD OPINION REHABILITATION HOSPITAL, LLC,

Defendant and Respondent.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Kern County. Sidney P. Chapin, Judge. Larry L. Padilla, in propria persona, for Plaintiff and Appellant. McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth, Mario L. Beltramo, Jr., Scott M. Reddie, and Daniel L. Wainwright for Defendant and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Gomes, J. and Poochigian, J.

Plaintiff Larry L. Padilla (Padilla), acting in propria persona (pro per), appeals from an order entered after the trial court granted defendant HealthSouth Bakersfield Rehabilitation Hospital, LLC’s (HealthSouth) motion to dismiss the case for failure to file an amended complaint. Because Padilla has presented no cognizable or intelligible legal argument challenging the judgment, we dismiss the appeal. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND HealthSouth is a health care provider that operates a 60-bed rehabilitation hospital. Padilla was a patient at HealthSouth from June 2 through June 17, 2010. Padilla filed an in pro per complaint against HealthSouth on May 11, 2012, asserting claims for general negligence, products liability and premises liability. The only act complained of is that on June 2, 2010, HealthSouth “dropped” him and left him unattended. Padilla alleged he suffered general damages and prayed for punitive damages according to proof. HealthSouth filed a demurrer to the three causes of action on the grounds they were barred by the applicable statute of limitations, failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and were uncertain, unintelligible and ambiguous. HealthSouth also filed a motion to strike the claim for punitive damages. Padilla did not file oppositions to either the demurrer or the motion to strike. Padilla appeared in pro per at the January 7, 20131 hearing on the demurrer and motion to strike; HealthSouth appeared through its attorney. The trial court sustained the demurrer with leave to amend based on the failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action and uncertainty (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subds. (e) & (f)), and granted the motion to strike. The court gave Padilla 20 days, or until January 28, to serve and file an amended complaint.