Fourth District, Division 3 Says “Yes,” But Reverses on a Procedural Point.
In Christopher B. Mears, a Professional Corp. v. REM Physical Therapy, Case No. G042204 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 24, 2010) (unpublished), the appellate court agreed with Gilman v. Dalby, 176 Cal.App.4th 606 (2009) [reviewed in our August 13, 2009 post] that an attorney’s lien for fees and costs has priority over a medical lien for services.
However, the Court of Appeal, in a 3-0 opinion authored by Justice Rylaarsdam, had to reverse because the trial court sustained a demurrer to a medical provider’s cross-complaint against attorney without leave by going beyond the face of the cross-complaint in making the ruling. The appellate panel did note that the lower court may have been correct in its dismissal of the medical provider’s cross-complaint, but remanded for the proper assessment—terming the victory as possibly “only a Pyrrhic one.”