__[Attorney name]__
__[Address]__
__[Telephone number]__

Attorney for Plaintiff, __[name]__


            _ _ _ _ _ _ Court, County of _ _ _ _ _ _
                   __[_ _ _ _ _ _ District]__

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  )   No. _ _ _ _ _ _
                               Plaintiff(s))
vs.                                                        )PROPOSED ORDER
                                                                          )
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  )   Hearing: __[date; time]__
                               Defendant(s))Department: _ _ _ _ _ _
_________________________  )   Trial Date: __[if set]__

     The motion of defendant, __[name]__, for summary judgment or
summary adjudication of issues was heard at the above date and
time. Appearing as attorneys were: __[List names of attorneys and
parties represented by each]__.
     After considering the papers filed in support of and in
opposition to the motion, the Court finds that the following
issues are without substantial controversy:
     1.   This action was commenced on the filing of plaintiff
__[name]__'s original complaint on April 1, 1995.
     2.   Plaintiff was fully informed of the consequences and
complications that could result from the surgical procedure.
     3.   Plaintiff verbally expressed his understanding of the
consequences and complications that could result from the
surgical procedure.
     4.   Plaintiff read, dated, and executed a form titled
"Consent to Surgery--Binding Waiver of Liability," which included
the following language: "I have discussed with my doctor in
considerable detail the nature, extent, and dangers of the
surgery to be performed, as well as the possible consequences,
complications, and side effects of that surgery, all of which I
fully understand. I still want the surgery. I do NOT want a
second opinion."
     5.   Plaintiff read, dated, and executed this form after
having been fully informed regarding the consequences and
complications that could result from the surgical procedure.
     In addition, the Court finds that a material, triable
controversy exists about the following issues:
     1.   Whether the date plaintiff became aware of defendant's
alleged medical malpractice was May 10, 1994.
               CONFLICTING EVIDENCE: Plaintiff's answers to requests
for admissions, answer no. 4 at p 3; transcript of plaintiff's
deposition at p 27, lines 3-5.
     2.   Whether plaintiff was not informed of the possible
consequences and complications of surgery until March 5, 1994,
after the surgery had been completed.
               CONFLICTING EVIDENCE: Plaintiff's declaration at p 2;
defendant's declaration at p 3.
     3.   Whether plaintiff did not sign the form entitled
"Consent to Surgery--Binding Waiver of Liability" until March 5,
1994, after the surgery had been completed.
               CONFLICTING EVIDENCE: Plaintiff's declaration at p 2;
defendant's declaration at p 3.
     4.   Whether plaintiff sustained loss of wages as a result
of defendant's acts.
               CONFLICTING EVIDENCE: Plaintiff's answers to requests
for admissions, answer no. 3; plaintiff's declaration at p 1,
lines 12-14.
     IT IS ORDERED that these issues be deemed established for
trial of this matter.

Date: _ _ _ _ _ _                                          [Signature]
                                                                                                          ________________________
                                                                                                                                            __[Typed name]__
                                                                                                         Attorney for _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
      

Return to Table of Contents for

Legal Forms : Set Two