From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fortman v. Forvaltningsbolaget Insulan AB

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Third Division
Feb 7, 2013
No. B237818 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 7, 2013)

Opinion


Page 544b

213 Cal.App.4th 544b __ Cal.Rptr.3d __ BARBARA FORTMAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. FORVALTNINGSBOLAGET INSULAN AB et al., Defendants and Respondents. B237818 California Court of Appeals, Second District, Third Division February 7, 2013

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. NC043615 Roy L. Paul, Judge.

THE COURT:

IT IS ORDERED the opinion filed by this court on January 10, 2013, 212 Cal.App.4th 830;___ Cal.Rptr.3d ___ certified for publication, is hereby modified as follows:

On page 1 [212 Cal.App.4th 830, advance report, line 3 of the caption], the caption is modified to read as follows: Barbara Fortman, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Förvaltningsbolaget Insulan AB et al., Defendants and Respondents, as shown in the caption of this modification order.

On page 1 [212 Cal.App.4th 831, advance report, line 1 of the counsel segment], in listing counsel for Plaintiff and Appellant, after the name “Lars Christian, ” insert “Johnson.”

On page 1 [212 Cal.App.4th 832, advance report,] following the listing of counsel Lesser & Associates and Steven M. McGuire, delete “Defendant and Respondent” and insert “Defendants and Respondents.”

On page 3 [212 Cal.App.4th 832, advance report, 4th par., lines 1-2], the first sentence in the first full paragraph commencing “On the day of” is modified to read as follows:

On the day of the scuba-diving accident, Myers was wearing a Catalyst 360 dry suit, manufactured by defendant White’s Manufacturing, Ltd. (White’s).

On page 4 [212 Cal.App.4th 834, advance report, 1st full par.], the second full paragraph is deleted and in its stead, insert the following paragraph: The company and White’s filed a joint motion for summary judgment, contending that Fortman could not establish a contemporaneous awareness of the causal connection between the injury-producing event and the resulting injury. They maintained that while Fortman may have seen her brother suffer injuries, she could not have perceived that he was being injured by the company’s product.

Page 544c

On page 5 [212 Cal.App.4th 834, advance report, 4th full par.], the first sentence in the first full paragraph commencing “After judgment was entered, ” is modified to read as follows:

After judgment was entered, Fortman filed this timely appeal.

On page 6 [212 Cal.App.4th 836, advance report, 1st full par., lines 4-5], the third sentence in the third full paragraph commencing “The company relies” is modified to read as follows:

The respondents rely on medical malpractice cases denying bystander recovery.

These modifications do not affect the judgment.


Summaries of

Fortman v. Forvaltningsbolaget Insulan AB

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Third Division
Feb 7, 2013
No. B237818 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 7, 2013)
Case details for

Fortman v. Forvaltningsbolaget Insulan AB

Case Details

Full title:BARBARA FORTMAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. FORVALTNINGSBOLAGET INSULAN…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, Third Division

Date published: Feb 7, 2013

Citations

No. B237818 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 7, 2013)