ROBERT GARBER V. USA, No. 17-55296 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 19 2018 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROBERT GARBER, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 17-55296 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:15-cv-05867-CAS-JPR v. MEMORANDUM* UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 16, 2018** Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Robert Garber appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) action alleging dental malpractice. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Landreth v. United States, 850 F.2d 532, 534 (9th Cir. 1988), and we affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The district court properly granted summary judgment on Garber’s FTCA claim because Garber failed to adduce expert testimony and therefore failed to establish a genuine dispute of material fact as to the elements of his medical malpractice claim. See Johnson v. Superior Court, 49 Cal. Rptr. 3d 52, 58 (Ct. App. 2006) (setting forth elements of medical malpractice claim under California law); Bushling v. Fremont Med. Ctr., 11 Cal. Rptr. 3d 653, 664 (Ct. App. 2004) (“[W]here the conduct required of a medical professional is not within the common knowledge of laymen, a plaintiff must present expert witness testimony to prove a breach of the standard of care. Plaintiff also must show that defendants’ breach of the standard of care was the cause, within a reasonable medical probability, of his injury.” (citations omitted)); see also Hutchinson v. United States, 838 F.2d 390, 393 (9th Cir. 1988) (when applying California medical malpractice law under the FTCA, “when the defendant supports his motion for summary judgment with the declarations of experts, a plaintiff who has presented no expert evidence concerning the required standard of care has failed to make a sufficient showing that there are genuine factual issues for trial”). AFFIRMED. 2 17-55296
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
