Black v. High Desert Medical Group CA2/4

Filed 7/19/22 Black v. High Desert Medical Group CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

DAVID BLACK, B300957

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC656902) v.

HIGH DESERT MEDICAL GROUP et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Los Angeles Superior Court, John Doyle, Judge. Affirmed. David E. Black, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Bonne, Bridges, Mueller, O’Keefe & Nichols and Mitzie Dobson; Cole Pedroza, Kenneth R. Pedroza, Matthew S. Levinson and Nayri Jilizian for Defendants and Respondents High Desert Medical Group, Charles M. Lim, M.D., Marvin Ginsburg, M.D., Kourosh Golestany, M.D., Dennis Latuno, M.D. and Davy Figueroa, M.D. Bowman and Brooke and Michael J. Hurvitz for Defendants and Respondents Livanta, LLC and Steven Stein, M.D.

Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith and Judith M. Tishkoff for Defendant and Respondent Lancaster Hospital Corporation dba Palmdale Regional Medical Center.

Plaintiff David E. Black, in pro. per., initiated a lawsuit against his wife’s healthcare providers as a result of her death in January 2016. As relevant here, the trial court sustained defendants Livanta, LLC and Dr. Steven Stein’s demurrer to plaintiff’s first amended complaint without leave to amend. The court subsequently sustained the demurrers of defendants High Desert Medical Group, its physicians, and Lancaster Hospital Corporation to plaintiff’s second amended complaint without leave to amend as to two causes of action and with leave to amend as to one cause of action. When plaintiff failed to file a third amended complaint, the trial court granted the remaining defendants’ motions to dismiss (Code Civ. Proc., § 581, subd. (f)(2)) and denied plaintiff’s motion for relief from dismissal (Code Civ. Proc., § 473). Although it is not entirely clear from his notice of appeal, plaintiff potentially appeals from (1) the judgment of dismissal entered in favor of High Desert Medical Group, its physicians, and Lancaster Hospital Corporation, (2) the order sustaining their demurrers to the second amended complaint, and (3) the order sustaining Livanta, LLC and Dr. Stein’s demurrer to the first amended complaint. On appeal, the gravamen of plaintiff’s argument is that the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing all the defendants. However, we lack jurisdiction over the court’s order sustaining Livanta, LLC and Dr. Stein’s demurrer, as explained below. Because plaintiff fails to affirmatively demonstrate error as to the other defendants, we affirm.