Melchor v. Pena
<script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript"> </script> <script type="text/javascript"> _uacct = "UA-1698443-1"; urchinTracker(); </script> <html ><br /> <head><br /> <title>Melchor v</title><br /> </head><br /> <body><br /> <div><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/><b >Melchor v. Pena</b><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>Filed 7/30/10 Melchor v. Pena CA1/5<br /> <br/><b<br /> > </b><br /> <br/><b<br /> > </b><br /> <br/><b<br /> > </b><br /> <br/><b<br /> > </b><br /> <br/><b<br /> >NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS</b><br /> <br/><b<br /> > </b><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>California<br /> Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or<br /> relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except<br /> as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This<br /> opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for<br /> purposes of rule 8.1115<b >.</b><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>IN<br /> THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>FIRST<br /> APPELLATE DISTRICT<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>DIVISION<br /> FIVE<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0<br /> ><br /> <tr ><br /> <td width=319 valign=top ><br /> <br/><b<br /> >JOSE MELCHOR et al.,</b><br /> <br/><b<br /> > Plaintiffs<br /> and Appellants,</b><br /> <br/><b<br /> >v.</b><br /> <br/><b<br /> >JORGE PENA et al.,</b><br /> <br/><b<br /> > Defendants<br /> and Respondents.</b><br /> </td><br /> <td width=319 valign=top ><br /> <br/><b > </b><br /> <br/><b > </b><br /> <br/><b > A124449</b><br /> <br/><b > </b><br /> <br/><b > (</b><b<br /> >Alameda</b><b<br /> > </b><b >County</b><b ></b><br /> <br/><b > Super. </b><b<br /> >Ct.</b><b<br /> > No. RG06302527)</b><br /> <br/><b > </b><br /> </td><br /> </tr><br /> </table><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> Jose<br /> Melchor and Natalie Melchor, by and through their guardians ad litem, Martin Melchor<br /> and Ramona Melchor, appeal from a judgment entered after the court granted the<br /> summary judgment motion of respondents Jorge Pena, M.D. and Gina Marie Adair,<br /> M.D. Appellants contend: a triable<br /> issue of material fact precluded the grant of summary judgment; the court<br /> erred in permitting the summary judgment hearing to be heard on less than the<br /> statutory-required notice; and the court erroneously denied their request for a<br /> continuance of the motion hearing. We<br /> will affirm the judgment.<br /> <br/>I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY<br /> <br/> In<br /> December 2006, Jose and Natalie Melchor, through their guardians ad litem,<br /> filed a complaint alleging professional<br /> negligence on the part of numerous defendants. Appellants alleged that the defendants'<br /> negligent examination, diagnosis, and treatment resulted in Jose and Natalie<br /> suffering herpes type II meningoencephalitis and developing cerebral palsy.[1] <br /> <br/> On<br /> January 24, 2008,<br /> appellants substituted Dr. Pena in the place of Doe 1. The complaint was later amended to add Dr.<br /> Adair as a defendant. <br /> <br/> A. <i >Pena's<br /> and Adair's Motion for Summary Judgment</i><br /> <br/> Drs.<br /> Pena and Adair filed a joint motion for summary judgment, contending that<br /> appellants could not establish that the doctors breached their duty of care or<br /> contributed to the alleged injury. In<br /> their statement of undisputed material facts, Drs. Pena and Adair asserted<br /> the following based on supporting evidence. <br /> <br /> <br/> Ramona<br /> Melchor became pregnant with twins, appellants Jose and Natalie, in 2001. Her primary physician for prenatal care, Dr.<br /> Indira Fulara, conducted a standard prenatal consultation, including a detailed<br /> medical history, and obtained the standard prenatal panel of laboratory<br /> tests. Ramona's laboratory results as to<br /> sexually transmitted diseases gonorrhea and Chlamydia were negative. <br /> <br/> In<br /> response to queries by both Dr. Fulara and a perinatal health worker, Ramona<br /> denied that she or her husband had any history of sexually transmitted diseases,<br /> including herpes. Ramona never told any<br /> health care provider at Family Care Center Merced, Mercy Medical Center Merced<br /> (Mercy), or University Medical<br /> Center (University) that she had<br /> sores on her genitals before Jose and Natalie were born. <br /> <br/> On<br /> January 18, 2002, Ramona<br /> reported to Mercy that she was having contractions. She was transferred to University for a<br /> higher level of care. The transfer<br /> report stated that Ramona had â€