Lawyers Deny Allegations by Doctor in UCI Inquiry

Lawyers for the University of California denied Wednesday a doctor’s allegation that she was pressured to give false answers during the probe of a medical malpractice case involving the UCI Medical Center.

The denial came one day after an Orange County judge issued an unusual ruling that tossed out the university’s defense in the case because of what he termed “systematic obstruction” of justice.

At stake are millions of dollars in University of California funds, sought as damages by the family of a Garden Grove woman left in coma after a 1993 operation, and the reputation of the prominent Southern California law firm Baker, Silberberg & Keener. The firm is representing UC and a handful of its doctors in the suit brought by Denise DeSoto’s family.

The former legal secretary, now 37, fell into a coma after a hand operation at the Orange-based medical center. She went into cardiac arrest after apparent complications with a breathing tube. Exactly why that happened in a procedure not considered life-threatening is in dispute.

Earlier this week, Dr. J.A. Marangu alleged in court documents that she was pressured by a UC attorney to make her story about what happened to DeSoto conform to the university’s, during sworn depositions before the case came to trial.

“I was instructed by Baker, Silberberg to ignore what really happened to Ms. DeSoto and to commit perjury,” Marangu alleged. The statement did not specify details about what the doctor considered untruthful testimony.

Marangu, a former resident at the medical center, is also named as a defendant in the DeSoto suit. She said she is in a dispute over the termination of her residency at UCI; the university declined to discuss that matter.

Marshall Silberberg, an Irvine attorney, heatedly denied Marangu’s allegation.

“My reputation has been built over 23 years,” Silberberg said. “People in this town know me and my reputation. It hurts me personally because I know it isn’t true. But how do you unring a bell?”

Silberberg’s firm has also represented O.J. Simpson in his civil case and a biologist, Teri Ord, involved in the recent UCI fertility clinic scandal. He and UC officials said they planned to appeal Tuesday’s decision by Judge C. Robert Jameson of Orange County Superior Court.

A court transcript released Wednesday revealed the depth of the judge’s anger at UC and its attorneys. Responding to Silberberg’s statement that he was “amazed” at allegations of obstruction, Jameson said:

“Don’t be amazed. Don’t be amazed. You guys have stonewalled this thing from the get-go.”

Later, the judge said that trying to get UC to cooperate in sharing information about the case “was like pulling teeth.” DeSoto’s attorneys contend that a key witness and evidence were hidden from them during a years-long fight for information.

In a statement issued Wednesday, UC’s top lawyer, James E. Holst, said the UC Board of Regents regretted Jameson’s ruling and supported Silberberg. “At no time would the university countenance delay or obstruction of justice,” Holst said.

Jameson is expected to hear arguments within the next month on damages that may be assessed against UC. The DeSoto family is seeking $15 million to $20 million. A separate trial is pending for doctors named in the suit.

Legal experts said Wednesday Jameson’s ruling continues a legal trend in which courts have cracked down on attorneys who hinder pretrial investigations known as discovery. By law, attorneys are required to share information before trials so they don’t have an unfair advantage.

William Simon, a Stanford University law professor, called Jameson’s ruling a strong step. “That very rarely occurs,” he said. “Historically, there has been lots of discovery abuse [by attorneys] and very little sanctions. Within the last 15 years, the courts have been trying to get their act together more and imposing sanctions more frequently than they had in the past.”

The California Bar Assn. can sanction attorneys who violate ethical rules.