Cramer v. Queen of Angels Hosp.
Decision Date | 13 October 1976 |
Citation | 62 Cal.App.3d 812,133 Cal.Rptr. 339 |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Parties | , 20 UCC Rep.Serv. 319 Joe B. CRAMER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. QUEEN OF ANGELS HOSPITAL, a Proprietary California Corporation, Defendant and Respondent. Civ. 47854. |
Girardi & Keese and Michael K. Bridges, Los Angeles, for plaintiff and appellant.
Early, Maslach, Boyd & Leavey, Harry Boyd and Richard C. Harding, Los Angeles, for defendant and respondent.
Plaintiff Joe B. Cramer appeals from the judgment entered following the grant of a motion for nonsuit in favor of defendant Queen of Angels Hospital. In his complaint, plaintiff alleged that he contracted serum hepatitis by reason of a blood transfusion administered to him while he was a patient in respondent hospital. Prior to trial, he elected to proceed on the theories of strict liability in tort and breach of express and implied warranties only.
Health and Safety Code section 1606 provides as follows:
'The procurement, processing, distribution, or use of whole blood, plasma, blood products, and blood derivatives for the purpose of injecting or transfusing the same, or any of them, into the human body shall be construed to be, and is declared to be, for all purposes whatsoever, the rendition of a service by each and every person, firm, or corporation participating therein, and shall not be construed to be, and is declared not to be, a sale of such whole blood, plasma, blood products, or blood derivatives, for any purpose or purposes whatsoever.'
In Shepard v. Alexian Brothers Hosp. (1973), 33 Cal.App.3d 606, 109 Cal.Rptr. 132, the court determined, by reason of that statute and its underlying rationale, that a hospital which administered a blood transfusion could not be held liable under the doctrine of strict liability in tort or for breach of warranty. That decision is controlling here.
Plaintiff contends that Health and Safety Code section 1606 is unconstitutional in that it creates a denial of the equal protection of the law for 'the victims of contaminated blood transfusions, who unlike all other tort victims of defective products do not have the doctrine of strict liability in their legal arsenal.'
California courts follow the United States Supreme Court in employing a two-level test for measuring legislative classifications against the equal protection clause. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Moore v. Regents of University of California
...fiction. (See, e.g., Hyland Therapeutics v. Superior Court (1985) 175 Cal.App.3d 509, 220 Cal.Rptr. 590; Cramer v. Queen of Angels Hosp. (1976) 62 Cal.App.3d 812, 133 Cal.Rptr. 339; Shepard v. Alexian Brothers Hosp. (1973) 33 Cal.App.3d 606, 109 Cal.Rptr. 132.) Thus despite the statute reli......
-
Samson v. Greenville Hosp. System
...See McDaniel v. Baptist Memorial Hospital, 469 F.2d 230, 235 (6th Cir.1972) (applying Tennessee law); Cramer v. Queen of Angels Hospital, 62 Cal.App.3d 812, 133 Cal.Rptr. 339 (1976); Glass v. Ingalls Memorial Hospital, 32 Ill.App.3d 237, 336 N.E.2d 495, 498 (1975). Our research indicates--a......
-
Samson v. Greenville Hosp. System
...469 F.2d 230 (6th Cir.1972); McKee v. Miles Laboratories, Inc., 675 F.Supp. 1060 (E.D.Ky.1987); Cramer v. Queen of Angels Hospital, 62 Cal.App.3d 812, 133 Cal.Rptr. 339 (1976); McAllister v. American National Red Cross, 240 Ga. 246, 240 S.E.2d 247 (1977); Glass v. Ingalls Memorial Hospital,......
-
Hyland Therapeutics v. Superior Court
...v. Sacramento Medical Foundation Blood Bank (1976) 62 Cal.App.3d 866, 872-873, 133 Cal.Rptr. 444; Cramer v. Queen of Angels Hospital (1976) 62 Cal.App.3d 812, 815-816, 133 Cal.Rptr. 339.) Equal-protection aspects of the application of section 1606 to commercial blood-product manufacturers s......