Benitez v. North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group

• July 2001 Case is filed in state court in San Diego.
• 2001 State Trial Court Court that hears the original arguments in a case, may include a jury throws Benitez’s discrimination lawsuit out of court based on federal law concerning employee health benefit plans.
• October 2002 Lambda Legal joins Benitez’s effort to get discrimination case reinstated by Filing Papers served upon a party in a case and filed with a court Amicus brief Brief submitted by person or organization to advise court on a particular issue in the case.
• March 2003 Court of Appeal issues unanimous, national first-of-its-kind decision that patients can sue doctors who discriminate based on sexual orientation and that federal law does not exempt health care providers from state civil rights laws.
• January 2004 Lambda Legal becomes Co-counsel Two or more unaffiliated lawyers representing the same party in the same matter for Benitez as case returns to trial court.
• April 2004 Trial court refuses doctors’ request to throw out Benitez’s claims for deceit, fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
• October 2004 Trial court rules in favor of Benitez, stating that doctors’ religious freedom rights do not permit them to ignore California’s civil rights Statute A federal or state written law enacted by the Congress or state legislature and rebuffing doctors’ attack on Benitez’s civil rights claim.
• December 2005 Court of Appeal rules that trial court was premature to rule in our favor and should conduct a trial about whether the doctors violated the civil rights law before deciding whether religion can provide a defense to a civil rights claim. We ask for reconsideration because the Court of Appeal’s ruling decided legal issues that had not been addressed by the parties, and the appellate court grants our request.
• March 2006 The Court of Appeal reissues its decision in essentially the same form.
• June 2006 California Supreme Court grants Lambda Legal’s request for review of the Court of Appeal’s decision.
• September 2006 Lambda Legal submits opening brief to California Supreme Court seeking reinstatement of the trial court decision that doctors must treat their lesbian patients like the rest of their patients, regardless of the doctors’ religious beliefs.
• February 2007 Lambda Legal submits reply Brief to California Supreme Court
• February — April 2007 friend-of-the-court briefs filed by 30 leading health care, community health policy, civil rights groups, and the Attorney General of California supporting nondiscrimination in health care, and 16 conservative religious and legal groups supporting the doctors’ religiously based discrimination.
• June 2007 Lambda Legal submits Answer to Amicus Curiae Briefs to California Supreme Court
• March 2008 Lambda Legal submits supplemental briefing per the Court’s request addressing Code of Civil Procedure, section 437c
• May 2008 Lambda Legal submits supplemental brief explaining relevance of the California Supreme Court’s decision in In re Marriage Cases that exclusion of lesbian and gay couples from marriage violates the California Constitution
• May 2008 Oral argument held before the California Supreme Court
• August 2008 Victory! California Supreme Court unanimously rules in favor of Benitez, making clear that California’s state law prohibiting discrimination must be followed.
• September 2009 Benitez, North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group and the individual defendant physicians announce they have reached a mutually satisfactory settlement for an undisclosed sum of money.

Benitez's Petition for Supreme Court Review (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Petition for Supreme Court Review (attachment 2) (10/28/2011)

Benitez Reply Brief on the Merits (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Response to Amicus Curiae Briefs supporting religious discrimination (10/28/2011)

Amicus Curiae Brief filed by the Attorney General of California in support of nondiscrimination in health care (10/28/2011)

Amicus Curiae Brief filed by Kaiser Foundation, et al. in support of nondiscrimination in health care (10/28/2011)

Amicus Curiae Brief filed by the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, et al. in support of nondiscrimination in health care (10/28/2011)

Amicus Curiae Brief filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, et al. in support of nondiscrimination in health care (10/28/2011)

Amicus Curiae Brief filed by the National Center for Lesbian Rights, et al. in support of nondiscrimination in health care (10/28/2011)

Amicus Curiae Brief filed by the National Health Law Program, et al. in support of nondiscrimination in health care (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Supplemental Brief Re New Authority (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Answer to Petition for Rehearing (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Opening Brief on the Merits (10/28/2011)

Reply by Benitez to Doctor's Answer to Benitez's Petition for Supreme Court Review (10/28/2011)

Amicus Curiae Brief Filed by 15 Civil Rights, Medical and Community Health Organizations in Opposition to the CMA and CMDA Briefs. (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Answer to Amicus Curiae Brief of Christian Medical and Dental Associations (10/28/2011)

Benitez v. North Coast Women's Care Medical Group (Brief) (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Answer to the California Medical Association's Amicus Curiae Brief (10/28/2011)

Benitez v. North Coast Women's Care Medical Group (Brief) (10/28/2011)

Benitez v. North Coast Women's Care Medical Group (Brief) (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Return to Order to Show Cause Regarding Petition for Writ of Mandate and/or Prohibition or Other Appropriate Relief (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Opposition to the Writ of Petition filed by the North Coast Women's Care Medical Group (10/28/2011)

Decision from the California Court of Appeal (10/28/2011)

Benitez California Supreme Court Decision (10/28/2011)

Decision from the California Court of Appeal (10/28/2011)

Declaration of Guadalupe T. Benitez (10/26/2017)

Benitez's Supplemental Letter Brief (10/28/2011)

Benitez's Responding Supplemental Letter Brief (10/28/2011)

Benitez v. North Coast Women's Care Medical Group, et. al.: Joint Statement of the Parties Upon Settlement of the Case (10/28/2011)