Cacau v. Tri County Eye Institute
Filed 4/4/06 Cacau v. Tri County Eye Institute CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| VIOREL CACAU, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TRI COUNTY EYE INSTITUTE, Defendant and Respondent. | E037541 (Super.Ct.No. RIC 405916) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Gary B. Tranbarger, Judge. Affirmed.
Viorel Cacau, in pro. per.
Reback, McAndrews & Kjar, Larry E. White and Vadim Braslavsky, for Defendant and Respondent.
Appellant Viorel Cacau (Cacau) appeals from the judgment dismissing his first amended complaint. Cacau failed to amend the complaint after the trial court sustained respondent Tri County Eye Institute's (Tri County's) demurrer with leave to amend. We find no merit in any of the five separate grounds that Cacau raises in this appeal, and so affirm the judgment.
Facts and Procedural Background
On December 9, 2003, Cacau filed a complaint for damages against Tri County. The complaint alleged: 1) medical malpractice; 2) liability tort; 3) negligence; and 4) breach of contract, fraud and misrepresentation. The complaint alleged that on or about June 5, 2000, one of Tri County's physicians permanently injured Cacau's left eye during laser surgery and that Tri County failed to refund Cacau's payment for laser surgery that was not completed on the right eye.[1]
On June 29, 2004, the trial court sustained Tri County's demurrer as to the medical malpractice cause of action without leave to amend. The trial court also sustained the demurrer as to the remaining causes of action but gave Cacau 60 days leave to amend. On August 16, 2004, Cacau filed a â€
