This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Medical
Malpractice

Zenaida Gutierrez v. The Regents of the University of California

Published: Jun. 3, 2022 | Result Date: Mar. 9, 2022 | Filing Date: Jul. 11, 2016 |

Case number: 2016-00197135 Verdict –  Defense

Judge

David De Alba

Court

Sacramento County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Nathaniel M. Leeds
(Mitchell Leeds, LLP)

Clifton N. Smoot
(The Veen Firm PC)


Defendant

Paul R. Baleria
(Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith, LLP)

Christopher T. Choi
(Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith LLP)


Facts

On June 21, 2010, Zenaida Gutierrez went to the U.C. Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center seeking a diagnosis for a lump on her left breast. Though she primarily speaks Spanish, her daughter, who was with her, served as a translator for all her visits to the U.C. Davis Cancer Center. Gutierrez was diagnosed with Ductal Carcinoma in Situ with microinvasion in her left breast. On September 8, 2010, she underwent a mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. Five years later, in 2015, Gutierrez was diagnosed with a recurrence of breast cancer and she went to an oncologist in Modesto to receive ongoing treatment.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff, Gutierrez, contended that the U.C. Davis physicians and its medical providers were negligent in their management of her breast cancer treatment, including that they did not appropriately follow up to ensure that she received chemotherapy. Specifically, she stated that after her surgery, surgeons discovered that the cancer was much more extensive than originally assumed. The fact that her cancer was more pervasive was not communicated to Gutierrez before she was discharged from surgical oncology. When Gutierrez was seen during her one and only visit with medical oncology on October 4th, chemotherapy was recommended. Gutierrez was unsure how she wanted to proceed. Moreover, there was no evidence that anyone discussed the risks of not receiving chemotherapy with her, nor was there evidence that anyone discussed the importance of future cancer screening. Following her October 4th visit, Gutierrez scheduled a second appointment with medical oncology, to happen on October 25th; that appointment was cancelled. While the head of medical oncology at UC Davis testified that it was common for cancer patients to get confused and it was their policy to call patients and investigate whenever a patient missed an appointment, here, medical oncology never investigated why Gutierrez missed her October 25th appointment. On November 9th, Gutierrez's daughter called surgical oncology to attempt to make a further appointment to address future treatment of her breast cancer and was told that there was no need to schedule with oncology, but that she should continue treatment with her plastic surgeon. Gutierrez then continued treatment with her plastic surgeon at UC Davis for another year and a half and nobody ever discussed chemotherapy or cancer screening with her during that period.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants, U.C. Davis Cancer Center and others, attested that the physicians and other medical providers involved with plaintiff's case, complied with the appropriate standard of care in the treatment, recommendations and follow-up of plaintiff's care. While there were no complications with the surgery, the surgical pathology report did reveal a multicentric disease which prompted an immediate referral to the medical oncology service. On October 4, 2010, the physicians at the U.C. Davis Cancer Center recommended that Gutierrez undergo chemotherapy along with targeted Herceptin therapy to address the cancer. Gutierrez was hesitant so appointments were made for a follow-up visit and for an echocardiogram in anticipation of commencing the medical treatment. Gutierrez never attended the subsequent appointments. On November 3, 2010, a staff member from the U.C. Davis Cancer Center decided to follow-up and called Gutierrez's daughter to advise her that Gutierrez should return to see the medical oncologists. Gutierrez still did not follow through and never returned to the Center.

Settlement Discussions

There were no Section 998 demands or offers.

Specials in Evidence

Plaintiff was seeking past medical damages of $2,200,043.78 and future medical of $2,006, 703.90.

Result

A jury returned a verdict for defense.

Deliberation

One hour

Poll

10-2.

Length

Eight days


#138871

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390