Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01199/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01199-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 362
Nature of Suit: Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 28:2671 Federal Tort Claims Act (Definitions)

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

1 .' _ ~ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MADISON-RAE JORDAN, individually 

and as next friend ofD.M., a minor, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Defendant. 

Case No.: 15-cv-1199 BEN (NLS) 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

DISMISS PLAINTIFF JORDAN'S 

NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF 

EMOTIONAL DISTRESS CLAIM 

18 Before this Court is a partial Motion to Dismiss, filed by Defendant United States 

19 of America. (Docket No. 17.) For the reasons stated below, the Motion is DENIED. 

20 BACKGROUND 

21 I. Procedural Background 

22 On May 29,2015, Plaintiff Madison-Rae Jordan, on behalf of herself and D.M., 

23 Plaintiff's three year-old child, initiated this medical malpractice action under the Federal 

24 Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671-80. (Docket No.1.) Defendant 

25 moved to dismiss Plaintiff's individual claim for medical malpractice. (Docket No.9.) 

26 The Court issued an order granting Defendant's motion and granting Plaintiffleave to 

27 amend. (Docket No. 15.) Plaintiff filed the operative First Amended Complaint ("FAC") 

28 on October 19,2015. (Docket No. 16.) Defendant then filed the instant motion pursuant 

15·cy·1199 

Case 3:15-cv-01199-BEN-NLS Document 22 Filed 01/11/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 5
1 to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing that Plaintifffailed to allege 

2 sufficient facts to support her individual claim for negligent infliction of emotional 

3 distress. 

4 II. Factual Backgroundl 

5 On May 3,2013, D.M. was treated at the Naval Hospital Camp Pendleton for flu6 like symptoms. (FAC ~~ 3, 19.) The next day, D.M. was brought to the hospital's 

7 emergency room where a Dr. Strohl decided to perform a lumbar puncture to test D.M. 

8 for meningitis. (F AC ~~ 20, 22.) Although Plaintiff was promised that the attending 

9 physician would perform the procedure, the resident, Dr. Lilli, actually performed the 

10 procedure. (FAC ~~ 23,24.) The procedure was performed before obtaining D.M.'s 

11 blood work, a blood culture, or starting an IV. (FAC ~ 22.) 

12 Plaintiff informed the doctors that D.M. needed to be restrained and sedated 

13 because he was very fidgety and not capable of sitting still. (FAC ~ 23.) However, D.M. 

14 was not sedated or restrained during the procedure, nor was any local anesthesia 

15 administered. (F AC ~ 24.) Plaintiff observed Dr. Lilli perform multiple punctures and 

16 watched as D.M. struggled and screamed. (FAC ~~ 24,25.) Plaintiff asserts that the 

17 experience was extremely traumatizing for her son and herself. (F AC ~ 25.) Plaintiff 

18 broke into tears. (F AC ~ 25.) After the procedure, D.M. vomited, experienced increased 

19 headache pain, and pain and weakness in his legs. (F AC ~ 27.) According to the 

20 Complaint, D.M. was unable to walk without pain or assistance within 12 hours of the 

21 procedure. (FAC ~27.) No further treatment occurred on May 5. (FAC ~ 31.) 

22 On May 6, 2015, D.M. was transferred to the Naval Medical Center San Diego 

23 where an MRI of his brain and spinal cord was conducted. (FAC ~ 35.) Afterwards, 

24 D.M. underwent an urgent laminoplasty and evacuation of the subarachnoid hemorrhage 

25 

26 

1 Unless otherwise noted, the following background is drawn from the allegations of 

27 Plaintiffs FAC. The Court is not making any factual findings, but rather only 

28 summarizing the relevant facts alleged for purposes of evaluating Defendant's motion to 

dismiss. 

2 

15·cv·1199 

Case 3:15-cv-01199-BEN-NLS Document 22 Filed 01/11/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 5
1 located on his lower spine. (FAC ~ 35.) 

2 Plaintiff Jordan alleges Defendant was negligent by: (1) performing the lumbar 

3 puncture, which it would have known was unnecessary had it waited for D.M.' s blood 

4 work; (2) failing to properly sedate and restrain D.M. during the lumbar puncture; and (3) 

5 delaying in diagnosing and treating D.M.' s symptoms after the lumbar puncture. (F AC ~ 

6 41.) Plaintiff also claims that Defendant negligently caused her to suffer emotional 

7 distress as she observed the procedure take place. (FAC ~ 42.) Jordan seeks damages on 

8 behalf ofD.M. for past and future pain and suffering, mental anguish, loss of income, 

9 medical and attendant care expenses, etc. (FAC ~ 44.) Jordan also seeks damages on 

10 behalf of herself for past and future suffering and mental anguish, medical, health care, 

11 and attendant care expenses for D.M. until his age of majority, and pecuniary damages. 

12 (FAC ~ 45.) 

13 LEGAL STANDARD 

14 I. Motion to Dismiss 

15 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b )(6), a court may dismiss a complaint 

16 if, taking all factual allegations as true, the complaint fails to state a plausible claim for 

17 relief on its face. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Bell Atl. Corp. v. 

18 Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 556-57 (2007). Dismissal is appropriate if the complaint fails to 

19 state enough facts to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of 

20 the matter complained of, or ifthe complaint lacks a cognizable legal theory under which 

21 relief may be granted. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556. "Threadbare recitals ofthe elements 

22 of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Iqbal, 

23 556 U.S. at 678. 

24 II. Applicable Law 

25 Under the FTCA, the United States may be held liable for the negligence of its 

26 agents or its employees. Liability is to be determined "in the same manner and to the 

27 same extent as a private individual under like circumstances." 28 U.S.C. § 2674. Tort 

28 actions under the FTCA are to be governed by the "law of the place." 28 U.S.C. § 

3 

15·cv·1199 

Case 3:15-cv-01199-BEN-NLS Document 22 Filed 01/11/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 5
1 1346(b); Kangley v. United States, 788 F.2d 533, 534 (9th Cir. 1986). Because the acts 

2 which are the subject of this action occurred in California, California law applies. 

3 DISCUSSION 

4 Defendant argues that Plaintiff s claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress 

5 fails because Plaintiff failed to allege that she was contemporaneously aware that the 

6 lumbar puncture was causing injury to D.M. at the time she observed the procedure. 

7 A plaintiff may recover damages for the emotional distress caused by observing 

8 the negligently inflicted injury of a third person, if the plaintiff: 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

(1) is closely related to the injury victim; (2) is present at the scene of the 

injury producing event at the time it occurs and is then aware that it is 

causing injury to the victim; and (3) as a result suffers serious emotional 

distress-a reaction beyond that which would be anticipated in a 

disinterested witness and which is not an abnormal response to the 

circumstances. 

Thing v. La Chusa, 48 Cal. 3d 644, 667-68 (1989). 

Defendant acknowledges that Plaintiff sufficiently alleged that she is closely 

16 related to D.M., was present during the lumbar puncture procedure, and suffered severe 

17 emotional distress. (Mot. at 6.) However, Defendant contends that Plaintiffs allegations 

18 are insufficient to show that she was aware, at the time she observed the procedure, that 

19 the procedure was causing D.M. harm. Thus, only the second element is at issue here. 

20 Defendant relies on Bird v. Saenz, 28 Cal. 4th 910 (2002) and Golstein v. Superior Court, 

21 223 Cal. App. 3d 1415 (1990). Those cases are distinguishable. 

22 In Golstein, parents monitored their child while he underwent radiation treatment. 

23 223 Cal. App. 3d at 1418. The child was overexposed to radiation, and suffered radiation 

24 poisoning and death. Id. The parents admitted that at the time of the treatment, they 

25 were not aware that their child was being overexposed. Id. The Court concluded that at 

26 the time the parents observed their child's treatment, they could not "experience a 

27 contemporaneous sensory awareness of the causal connection between the negligent 

28 conduct and the resulting injury." Id. at 1427. 

4 

15·cv-1199 

Case 3:15-cv-01199-BEN-NLS Document 22 Filed 01/11/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 5
1 In Bird, the court did not decide whether the plaintiff-bystanders could recover for 

2 negligent infliction of emotional distress until a motion for summary judgment had been 

3 filed. 28 Cal. 4th at 912. In addition, the plaintiffs did not witness the actual event that 

4 caused their mother's suffering. Id. at 916. Instead, they observed a number of 

5 surrounding circumstances and after-effects. Id. at 917. 

6 Taking the facts alleged in the F AC as true, Plaintiff has adequately stated a claim 

7 for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Here, Plaintiff alleged that she watched 

8 through a window as the procedure was performed on her son. After requesting that 

9 D.M. be restrained or sedated, Plaintiff witnessed the resident doctor conduct multiple 

10 punctures while D.M. struggled and screamed without restraint or sedation. The facts 

11 alleged show that Plaintiff witnessed and was aware that her son was suffering harm as a 

12 result of the procedure. These facts are sufficient to support a reasonable expectation that 

13 discovery might reveal evidence ofthis matter. See Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556. 

14 Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion. 

15 CONCLUSION 

16 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. As this Motion was taken under 

17 submission (Docket No. 21), Defendant's Motion to Appear Telephonically (Docket No. 

18 19) is DENIED as moot. 

19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Dated: January £ 2016 

H . gerT. Benitez 

United States District Judge 

5 

15-cv-1199 

Case 3:15-cv-01199-BEN-NLS Document 22 Filed 01/11/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 5 of 5