Expert Failed to Offer Admissible Evidence in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment

by Low, Ball & Lynch

Sanchez v. Kern Emergency Medical Transportation Corporation


An expert opinion filed in opposition to a summary judgment must be based on admissible evidence. In Sanchez v. Kern Emergency Medical Transportation Corporation, Plaintiff sustained an injury to his head while playing in a high school football game. The standby paramedic assessed plaintiff using the Glasgow Coma Scale and gave him the highest possible scores based on his responses. Nevertheless, the paramedic advised plaintiff to go to the hospital and called for a backup transport ambulance. The crew of the transport ambulance applied spinal precautions and transported plaintiff to the hospital 31 miles away. Forty-six minutes elapsed from the time plaintiff was first assessed by the paramedic to the time he arrived at the hospital. Plaintiff received a CT scan upon arrival which revealed a subdural hematoma, drugs were administered to reduce the brain swelling, and plaintiff underwent surgery to relieve a brain hemorrhage. At some point in time, plaintiff suffered a posterior artery stroke.

Plaintiff sued Kern Emergency Medical Transportation Corporation (“Kern”), among others, for his injuries. Plaintiff alleged that Kern was grossly negligent in the care and treatment it rendered to him, failed to properly assess him and failed to recognize he had sustained a traumatic brain injury that required immediate, urgent transport to a trauma center. Plaintiff alleged the delay in transport made his brain injury worse.

Kern moved for summary judgment asserting there was no evidence to support plaintiff’s allegations of gross negligence or causation of any damages. Kern supported its motion by submitting evidence that any delay caused by using two ambulances was only 2 ½ minutes which did not harm plaintiff or increase his injuries. Kern also submitted evidence that the delay, even if found to be 30 minutes, could not have caused plaintiff harm because the medical literature indicates there is no evidence such a brief delay in treatment correlates with a worse outcome. Kern submitted declarations from expert witnesses addressing the issues of breach of duty and causation.

When a plaintiff claims negligence in the medical context, the plaintiff must present evidence from an expert that the defendant breached his or her duty to the plaintiff and that the breach caused the injury to the plaintiff. Powell v. Kleinman (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 112, 123.When a defendant moves for summary judgment and supports his motion with expert declarations that his conduct fell within the community standard of care, he is entitled to summary judgment unless the plaintiff comes forward with conflicting expert evidence. Id.

Plaintiff submitted a declaration from neurological surgery expert witness, Dr. Fardad Mobin, in support of his opposition to the motion. Dr. Mobin opined that had plaintiff been transported immediately upon initial contact by the paramedic, there would have been a decrease in brain swelling and pressure because the administration of drugs would have occurred much sooner. Dr. Mobin only referenced the 46 minutes which elapsed between plaintiff’s first contact with the paramedics and his arrival at the hospital and failed to set forth any other relevant time periods in his declaration relating to the alleged delay that caused plaintiff’s injuries to worsen.

The defense raised a number of objections to Dr. Mobin’s declaration arguing that the opinions expressed were conclusory, speculative, failed to consider undisputed facts in the record, and failed to address statements made by defense experts that refuted those opinions. The trial court sustained the objections to Dr. Mobin’s declaration and granted Kern’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiff failed to present any admissible evidence contesting Kern’s evidence that any delay in transport to the hospital did not make plaintiff’s condition worse. Plaintiff appealed.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s ruling finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in sustaining the objections to Dr. Mobin’s declaration. The Court found that Dr. Mobin’s declaration failed to demonstrate his opinions were based on matters that experts reasonably rely on in forming such opinions and failed to include a reasoned explanation connecting the factual predicates to the ultimate conclusion.

The Court noted that Dr. Mobin referred generally to a delay in transport but failed to define the delay referred to in forming his opinions and failed to address that time was properly spent on assessment by the paramedics and application of spinal precautions. The Court also noted that Dr. Mobin failed to address medical literature presented by defense experts that a moderate delay in treatment could not have affected plaintiff’s outcome. The court found that Dr. Mobin had no factual basis for concluding that the delay in transporting plaintiff to the hospital exacerbated his injuries suffered on the football field.

The Court of Appeal found that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of material fact on the issue of causation, and the trial court’s ruling granting Kern’s motion for summary judgment was upheld.


An expert opinion filed in opposition to a summary judgment motion does not need to be as extensive as those offered in support, but it still must be adequately supported to be admissible evidence. An expert’s opinion based on assumptions of fact without evidentiary support or on speculative or conjectural factors has no evidentiary value and may be excluded from evidence.

For a copy of the complete decision, see: Sanchez v. Kern Emergency Medical Trans.


Written by:

Low, Ball & Lynch

Low, Ball & Lynch on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.