UC Davis Bad Vet
Trial Transcript Excerpts
Home | Trial Transcripts | Consumer Protection? | AAHA | Links

2-9-2009; Pages 188-189

Mr. Evans - defendants Golub and Valente's attorney
Mr. Cunningham - plaintiff U.C. Regents' attorney

8           THE COURT:  And I am going to deny your motion. 

 9  In terms of whether there was an agreement to $7500, 00 I

10  find that Exhibit's one and two were in fact contracts,

11  and although they are not a model of clarity, and in fact

12  -- all right.  They are not a model of clarity, but I do

13  find that they are a contract and they do say that they

14  are an estimate -- an initial estimate, that exact costs

15  cannot be quoted because they may change rapidly and

16  significantly as the patients condition changes, and they

17  say a clinician will attempt to advise you if the charges

18  are likely to substantially exceed this estimate.  They

19  don't say the clinician will advise you and get your

20  approval.

21           MR. EVANS:  Your Honor, if I may be heard on

22  that.  For one there was no evidence from the Plaintiff

23  that they even attempted to advise my client that the

24  charges would exceed, which they substantially exceeded

25  $7500.00, and in addition we're talking about time frame


1  of 7/24 to 8/14 or something.  We're talking about a long

 2  time frame.  So the idea that there was an immediate

 3  complication that we could not inform them of increasing

 4  cost is ridiculous.

 5           THE COURT:  Mr. Evans, it doesn't say anything

 6  like we'll attempt to advise you if -- it doesn't speak to

 7  any kind of I immediate immediacy.  So Mr. Cunningham, can

 8  you respond to this about the clinician will attempt to

 9  advise you? 

10           MR. CUNNINGHAM:  It says the clinician will

11  attempt to advise you if there is a substantial

12  difference.  First of all I would say there was no

13  substantial difference. 

14           THE COURT:  Okay.  I will disagree with you on

15  that point.  I think there is clearly a substantial

16  difference between $8500.00 which is the total listed here

17  and what it ended up being $17,000.

18           MR. CUNNINGHAM:  $17,000.

19           THE COURT:  So I think that's substantial.