Sacramento Birth Injury Lawyer Blog

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this birth injury case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this medical malpractice lawsuit and its proceedings.)

SYMPATHY PLEAS ARE IMPROPER AND VIOLATE THE LAW

Whether or not following this incident defendant Green was remorseful, depressed, or in any other way was upset over this incident and its consequences is irrelevant to any issue in this case, and any evidence of it or argument would be unduly prejudicial and involve an undue amount of time to rebut. Any plea of sympathy for Defendant Green is improper because it asks the jury to violate the law and their oath to judge the case based on the evidence presented to them and without regard to sympathy for any party. While such a plea can be cleverly worded and disguised in its presentation, it is still inadmissible and improper and should not be allowed by this Court.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

EVIDENCE CODE § 352 MANDATES EXCLUSION OF SYMPATHY PLEAS. AS IT WOULD RESULT IN PREJUDICE TO PLAINTIFF. CONFUSION OF THE ISSUES. AND WOULD MISLEAD THE JURY SUCH THAT ITS PREJUDICIAL EFFECT OUTWEIGHS ITS PROBATIVE VALUE

This Court has the discretion to exclude prejudicial evidence. California Evidence Code § 352 provides that:

Continue reading " Medical Malpractice Suit Filed Against Sacramento Dcotors For Birth Injuries, Part 2 of 2 " »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this birth injury case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this medical malpractice lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Prohibit Argument or Evidence of Defendant's Grief, Sorrow or Remorse

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiffs will move this court in limine, before trial and selection of jury, for the following orders:

1. Prohibit testimony and argument of grief, remorse or sorrow by Defendant Green with respect to plaintiff following his birth.

This motion is made on the grounds that such evidence is not relevant to any issues presented in this action, and would be highly improper and prejudicial to Plaintiffs.

This motion is based upon this notice, the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, any documents already on file with this Court, and upon such other oral and documentary evidence as may be presented prior to or at the hearing of this matter.

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

INTRODUCTION

This is a medical negligence action involving the care and treatment provided to the plaintiff Amy Choo during thge course of her labor and delivery with the minor plaintiff Ellen Choo. Plaintiffs anticipate that defense counsel may improperly attempt to appeal to the trier of fact's sympathy by eliciting testimony concerning any grief, sorrow or remorse by Defendant Paul Green, M.D., following the delivery of plaintiff in an unjustified effort to relieve the defendants from liability for Plaintiffs' significant and permanent injuries.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading " Sacramento Obstetrician Sued For Birth Injuries, Part 1 of 2 " »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this birth injury case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this medical malpractice lawsuit and its proceedings.)

SYMPATHY PLEAS ARE IMPROPER AND VIOLATE THE LAW

Any plea of sympathy for the individual defendants is improper because it asks the jury to violate the law and their oath to judge the case based on the evidence presented to them and without regard to sympathy for any party. While such a plea can be cleverly worded and disguised in its presentation, it is still inadmissible and improper and should not be allowed by this Court.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

EVIDENCE CODE §352 MANDATES EXCLUSION OF SYMPATHY PLEAS. AS IT WOULD RESULT IN PREJUDICE TO PLAINTIFF. CONFUSION OF THE ISSUES. AND WOULD MISLEAD THE JURY SUCH THAT ITS PREJUDICIAL EFFECT OUTWEIGHS ITS PROBATIVE VALUE

This Court has the discretion to exclude prejudicial evidence. California Evidence Code § 352 provides that:

The court, in its discretion, may exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will (a) necessitate undue consumption of time, or (b) create substantial danger of undue prejudice, confusion of the issues, or of misleading the jury.

Continue reading " Sacramento Doctors Sued For Birth Injuries, Part 2 of 2 " »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this birth injury case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this medical malpractice lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Prohibit Argument or Evidence of Sympathy for the Individual Defendant Physician

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiffs will move this court in limine, before trial and selection of jury, regarding the following orders:

1. Don't put a yoke over any of the individual defendant physician by a verdict.
2. Don't shame any of the individual defendant physician by a verdict against them.
3. Don't hurt any of the individual defendant physician's reputation.
4. Don't put the individual defendant physician out of business.
5. Don't jeopardize the individual defendant physician's medical licenses.
6. Don't hurt the defendant financially by your verdict.
7. The individual defendant physician will have to personally pay this verdict.
8. A medical malpractice verdict will discourage good doctors from trying to help patients.

This motion is made on the grounds that such evidence is not relevant to any issues presented in this action, and would be highly improper and prejudicial to Plaintiff.

This motion is based upon this notice, the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, any documents already on file with this Court, and upon such other oral and documentary evidence as may be presented prior to or at the hearing of this matter.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading " Sacramento Mother And Daughter File Birth Injury Lawsuit, Part 1 of 2 " »