California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Armin v. Riverside Cmty. Hosp., 210 Cal.Rptr.3d 388, 5 Cal.App.5th 810 (Cal. App. 2016):
The argument fails grammatically because the use of the indefinite article "a"as in "a pending peer review hearing"signals exactly the opposite of what the hospital says it means. According to the hospital, the phrase "a pending peer review hearing" limits the set of such hearing to physicians not facing such hearings. That's incorrect. The use of the indefinite article in the words "a pending peer review proceeding" signifies any pending peer review proceeding, including one brought by a physician who has also brought a section 1278.5 action. As our high court said in Pineda v. Bank of America, N.A. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 1389, 13961397, 117 Cal.Rptr.3d 377, 241 P.3d 870 : "Use of the indefinite articles a or an signals a general reference , while use of the definite article the (or these in the instance of plural nouns) refers to a specific person, place, or thing." (Italics added.)
3. Policy Arguments
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.