Peterson v. Perry CA1/2

Filed 12/30/15 Peterson v. Perry CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

RALPH PETERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, A140327 v. ROD PERRY, et al., (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG12656812) Defendants and Respondents.

Plaintiff Ralph Peterson, M.D. (Dr. Peterson) is a medical doctor who had hospital privileges at Alta Bates Summit Medical Center (Alta Bates). Facing possible suspension of his privileges, Dr. Peterson resigned from the medical staff of Alta Bates on April 6, 2009. On November 19, 2012 Dr. Peterson filed a complaint against Rod Perry, M.D. and Neil Stollman, M.D. (when referred to collectively, defendants) who, he claimed had engaged in misconduct leading him to resign. Defendants filed a motion to strike pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, section 425.16 (anti-SLAPP motion). By order entered May 9, 2013, the trial court granted the anti-SLAPP motion, which order said Dr. Peterson’s “Complaint is HEREBY DISMISSED.” Defendants thereafter moved for attorney fees. On September 12, 2013 the trial court entered a “Judgment of Dismissal,” which provided in its entirety as follows: “This Court having granted the special motion to strike pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §425.16 of Defendants ROD PERRY, M.D. and NEIL STOLLMAN, M.D. (“Defendants”) and having entered its ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION

1

TO STRIKE on May 9, 2013, and having granted, in part, Defendants’ motion for award of attorneys’ fees and costs and having entered its ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES on August 16, 2013, now enters judgment as follows: “IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Complaint of Plaintiff RALPH PETERSON, M.D. in this action is dismissed with prejudice, that Plaintiff RALPH PETERSON shall take nothing from Defendants, and that Defendants shall recover from Plaintiff RALPH PETERSON their attorney fees and costs of suit in the amount of $33,327.64.” On November 22, 2013 Dr. Peterson filed a notice of appeal, stating that he was appealing from the judgment and order entered “09/24/13.” Dr. Peterson’s opening brief contends that granting the anti-SLAPP motion was wrong, both procedurally and substantively, his brief attacking only the original order granting the anti-SLAPP motion. Defendants’ respondents’ brief first argues that Dr. Peterson’s notice of appeal was not timely, and his appeal should be dismissed. We agree, and we dismiss the appeal. BACKGROUND The Facts Dr. Peterson is a medical doctor, whose practice focused on gastroenterology. He became a member of the medical staff at Alta Bates in 1982. On February 1, 2007 Dr. Stollman became Chief of the Gastroenterology Service within the Department of Medicine at Alta Bates. In late 2008 or early 2009 Dr. Stollman reviewed several incident reports raising concerns about Dr. Peterson’s treatment of patients, particularly as to the adequacy of coverage for them. On February 12, 2009, Dr. Stollman, along with Dr. Perry, Chairman of the Department of Medicine, met with Dr. Peterson to discuss various concerns. Shortly after that meeting, Dr. Perry sent Dr. Peterson a letter reminding him of the need to arrange coverage for his practice, and requiring that by the end of March he submit a plan to ensure such coverage. Meanwhile, other incidents occurred, including one where Dr. Peterson expressly refused Dr. Perry’s request to come to the hospital to treat a patient experiencing an urgent gastroenterological problem.