March 5, 2025

Zaragoza v. Adam (Jan. 31, 2025, A168100) ___ Cal.App.5th___ (2025 WL 630923)

Plaintiff suffered pain from a bile leak after gallbladder removal surgery and filed a complaint for medical negligence. Defendant moved for summary judgment and submitted the declaration of a medical expert stating that the surgery was performed within the standard of care. The trial court granted summary judgment. Plaintiff appealed, arguing the medical expert failed to provide a reasoned explanation for his opinions.

The Court of Appeal reversed, finding defendant’s medical expert did not prove the absence of negligence because the expert failed to support his opinions with sufficient factual detail and reasoned explanation. The medical expert did not, for example, explain what acts constitute due care when performing a gallbladder removal, how those acts are related to preventing a bile leak, or how the expert ruled out a negligent cause for the bile leak. “A moving defendant’s ‘burden to show the absence of any genuine issue of material fact cannot be satisfied by an expert declaration consisting of ultimate facts and conclusions that are unsupported by factual detail and reasoned explanation, even if it is admitted and unopposed.’ ”