Tayefeh v. Kern Medical Center CA5

Filed 1/29/24 Tayefeh v. Kern Medical Center 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FARZIN TAYEFEH et al., F085746 Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Super. Ct. No. BCV-15-100647) v.

KERN MEDICAL CENTER et al., OPINION Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Eric Bradshaw, Judge. Fenton Law Group, and Benjamin J. Fenton for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Hall Hieatt Connely & Bowen, Mark B. Connely and Stephanie A. Bowen for Defendants and Respondents. -ooOoo-

INTRODUCTION Plaintiff and appellant Farzin Tayefeh, M.D. (Tayefeh), along with Farzin Tayefeh, M.D., Inc. (collectively, plaintiffs), appeal from a costs award in favor of defendants and respondents Kern Medical Center (KMC) and the County of Kern (collectively, defendants). Plaintiffs claim the costs for the deposition of an out-of-state witness were unnecessary and unreasonable, and they assert that expert witness costs should not have been awarded and were otherwise unreasonable. Defendants dispute the trial court erred in any respect and request sanctions against plaintiffs for filing a frivolous appeal. For the reasons discussed post, plaintiffs have not established the trial court abused its discretion in awarding costs. We therefore affirm the trial court’s award of costs and deny defendants’ motion for sanctions. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This case arises from defendants’ election to terminate Tayefeh’s temporary hospital privileges in January 2015 after receiving notification that the Medical Board of California (MBC) had filed an accusation against Tayefeh seeking revocation or suspension of his medical license. Tayefeh filed suit against defendants, claiming KMC had wrongfully terminated his privileges by not providing him with hearing and appellate rights in violation of KMC’s medical staff bylaws. The case proceeded to a jury trial in 2017, which resulted in a judgment in favor of defendants. The judgment was reversed on appeal and, in May 2021, defendants served plaintiffs with an offer to compromise under Code of Civil Procedure section 9981 in the amount of $20,000, which plaintiffs rejected. Thereafter, the parties agreed to a court trial, which was held in 2022. The trial court found in favor of defendants on plaintiffs’