Advertisement

UC Must Pay Stone’s Defense in at Least One Case

Share
TIMES STAFF WRITER

A judge has ordered the University of California to pay for the defense of one of three doctors accused in a case stemming from the UC Irvine fertility scandal--a move that may push the university to pay in many more cases, the physician’s attorney said Friday.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Leonard Goldstein ruled that the university owed Dr. Sergio C. Stone a defense because he was acting within the scope of his employment when he treated Susan Clay. Clay has since filed suit, claiming her eggs were stolen and implanted in another woman who gave birth to a child in Mexico.

Goldstein said Stone’s only involvement in Clay’s case was to monitor her ultrasound examination. He did not ordinarily do egg and embryo transfers.

Advertisement

“It’s a major victory for my client,” said Karen Taillon, Stone’s attorney, who said the decision likely will cause the university to reconsider its opposition to paying for Stone’s defense in other cases.

Clay’s case is considered the lead among more than 40 lawsuits filed against the university and the doctors alleging egg and embryo misappropriation and other improprieties. In addition to Stone, she has sued the university and Stone’s two partners, Drs. Ricardo H. Asch and Jose P. Balmaceda. All three deny any intentional wrongdoing.

A university attorney said Friday that he was disappointed with the ruling, but he did not see it as having an effect on the university’s decision not to pay for the defense of Asch and Balmaceda, both of whom regularly did egg and embryo transfers. UC General Counsel James E. Holst said his office has not had time to consider whether it will appeal the decision on Stone’s defense.

The university thus far has declined to pay for all three doctors’ defenses, alleging they acted outside the scope of their employment and engaged in fraud. The university erred, Goldstein found, when it made a “blanket decision” not to defend the trio in any of the cases. He wrote that the law requires each case to be considered on its own merits.

Advertisement