Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02346/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02346-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 362
Nature of Suit: Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 28:1391 Personal Injury

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

E.K. WADE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

 /

No. C 06-2346 CRB

Related Case No. C 06-2925 CRB

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Plaintiff E.K. Wade, acting in pro per, now brings this action against the United States

of America apparently under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) for claims of negligent

infliction of emotional distress and medical malpractice arising out of treatment he received

at a Department of Veteran Affairs hospital in Martinez, California. Three related actions

were previously dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and the Court

issues a separate order in a fourth related case also subject to a motion to dismiss. Now

pending before the Court is defendant’s motion to dismiss. After carefully considering the

record, and with the benefit of oral argument, defendant’s motion is hereby DENIED.

Defendant filed its motion to dismiss the original Complaint, which was subsequently

amended by plaintiff. In its motion, defendant moved to: (1) dismiss the Department of

Veteran Affairs (“VA”) from the case as an improper party; (2) strike the demand for a jury

trial as improper under the Seventh Amendment; and (3) strike the claim for punitive

damages as unavailable in an action against the federal government. 

Case 3:06-cv-02346-CRB Document 21 Filed 08/07/06 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

G:\CRBALL\2006\2346\order re mtd.wpd 2

Defendant acknowledged at oral argument that plaintiff’s Amended Complaint cured

the alleged defects. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 7, 2006

 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-02346-CRB Document 21 Filed 08/07/06 Page 2 of 2