Legal Opinion

Payne v. Anaheim Memorial Medical Center, Inc.

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 31, 2005No. G032799PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BEDSWORTH, Acting P. J.

The doctrine requiring exhaustion of internal remedies before resort to the courts is sound and wise—where such remedies are adequate. Sometimes, however, they are not. Where, as here, the “internal remedies” included no requirement of a hearing or formal resolution of the complaints raised, they cannot bar access to the courts.

Anaheim Memorial Medical Center, Inc. obtained a judgment on the pleadings against David H. Payne, M.D., on the basis his complaint was barred by his failure to exhaust administrative remedies contained in the hospital’s medical staff…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Abelleira v. District Court of AppealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Harris v. Capital Growth Investors XIVCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Schifando v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Rojo v. KligerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Alcorn v. Anbro Engineering, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1970

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare System, LPCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  2. Sanchez v. City of ModestoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
  3. Marsh v. San Diego CountyDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2006
  4. Nesson v. Northern Inyo County Local Hospital DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  5. Hearn Pacific Corp. v. Second Generation Roofing, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2016

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API