Doe v. Kachru (Oct. 13, 2025, A168669) __Cal.Rptr.3d__ (2025 WL 2902027)
Plaintiff sued a hospital and medical personnel, alleging traumatizing injuries during labor and birth. Plaintiff was initially discharged from the hospital despite severe pain. When readmitted, medical staff exposed plaintiff during exams without giving her a chance to object, injured her without consent, and brought additional personnel into the room despite her requests for privacy. After telling plaintiff that the only way to avoid a C-Section delivery was a vacuum-assisted delivery, the doctor performed a vacuum-assisted delivery against plaintiff’s objections
The trial court sustained a demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint and dismissed plaintiff’s action. Plaintiffs appealed.
The Court of Appeal affirmed sustaining of the demurrer to all claims except the medical battery claim against the defendant doctor based on the vacuum-assisted delivery. The court held the vacuum-assisted delivery was “substantially different” from the procedures plaintiff had consented to, since no evidence showed an emergency requiring it despite plaintiff’s objections. As to the other acts committed by the medical staff upon plaintiff’s readmission to the hospital, the court explained that by voluntarily admitting herself into the hospital, plaintiff impliedly consented to that medical care.
