Cedars-Sinai Sexual Abuse Lawsuit: Understanding How Hospitals Can Be Held Accountable

‍

If you were treated by Dr. Barry J. Brock at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, learning about these lawsuits may feel overwhelming or unsettling. People describe that “Ah ha” moment when they discover they are not alone. You think…”Wow, has this been happening to other people?”

These cases are not only about the actions of one physician. They are also about whether a hospital failed to protect patients despite the huge red flags.

Over the past several years, more than 160 former patients have filed civil lawsuits in California alleging that Dr. Brock engaged in sexual abuse during OB-GYN care, sometimes over the course of decades. The lawsuits also raise serious questions about Cedars-Sinai’s oversight and response. Did they even listen to the patient’s complaints? 

Understanding how hospitals can be held accountable may help survivors make sense of what happened and what options exist. One thing is for certain: these problems don’t just go away.

‍

What Survivors Are Alleging Happened During Medical Care

According to the lawsuits, patients allege that during gynecological or obstetric visits, they experienced conduct that went far beyond appropriate medical care, including:

• Unnecessary or invasive pelvic exams, including digital penetration without gloves, proper explanation, or consent
• Procedures presented as routine care that survivors later learned had no medical justification
• Inappropriate comments about their bodies or requests to remain unclothed in unusual or uncomfortable situations
• Improper touching of breasts or genital areas during exams
• Exams conducted without chaperones or safeguards, even during highly sensitive encounters

Many survivors report that when concerns were raised, they were dismissed or minimized with explanations such as “that’s just how he is,” leaving patients doubting their own instincts.

The lawsuits allege this conduct occurred over more than 40 years, with some claims dating back to the 1980s. Cedars-Sinai terminated Dr. Brock’s hospital privileges in September 2024 after what it described as “concerning complaints from patients” and reported him to the Medical Board.

‍

Why Cedars-Sinai’s Role Matters

For many survivors, the most painful question is not only what happened, but why it was allowed to continue.

The lawsuits allege that Cedars-Sinai and affiliated clinics failed in their responsibility to protect patients, even after receiving complaints or noticing troubling patterns.

‍

Failure to Investigate and Respond

Plaintiffs contend that Cedars-Sinai was put on notice multiple times about Dr. Brock’s conduct but failed to conduct meaningful investigations or take timely action. Despite complaints, he reportedly retained hospital privileges until late 2024.

Some survivors allege that concerns were brushed off as personality issues rather than being treated as serious safety warnings. You were almost expected to just accept the behavior as a character flaw.

‍

Negligent Hiring, Retention, and Supervision

Under California law, hospitals have a duty to exercise reasonable care in hiring, supervising, and retaining physicians. This includes responding appropriately when there are signs that a doctor may pose a risk to patients.

To establish negligent hiring or retention, a survivor generally must show that:

• The hospital hired or kept the physician
• The physician was unfit or dangerous
• The hospital knew or should have known of that risk
• The hospital’s failure to act contributed to the harm

In the Brock cases, survivors allege that Cedars-Sinai should have recognized red flags, such as repeated complaints and unusual exam practices, and failed to intervene.

‍

Why Survivors Often Focus on Institutional Negligence

Many survivors understandably ask why hospitals are sued when the abuse was committed by a doctor. The reason is simple. Hospitals are responsible for creating safe systems of care. They employ these people and are therefore responsible for how their employees behave in the workplace. 

California courts are often reluctant to hold hospitals automatically liable for sexual abuse under “vicarious liability” rules alone. Instead, survivors often pursue claims based on the hospital’s own negligence, such as failures in supervision, investigation, or patient safeguards.

When institutions ignore complaints, fail to require chaperones, or prioritize reputation over safety, those failures can directly cause harm. It is the hospital ignoring the red flags that is compounding the issue and making the problem bigger.

‍

Why Medical Abuse Can Persist for Years

Understanding how abuse can continue in healthcare settings helps survivors release misplaced self-blame.

‍

The Trust and Power Imbalance

OB-GYN care places patients in deeply vulnerable positions. Doctors hold authority, medical knowledge, and control of the environment. That imbalance can make it difficult for patients to question what is happening in the moment.

Hospitals are expected to anticipate this vulnerability and put protections in place.

‍

Institutional Pressure and Silence

Hospitals may face internal pressures to minimize complaints, protect high-volume physicians, or avoid public scrutiny. Survivors in the Cedars-Sinai cases allege that reports were ignored rather than escalated.

‍

Delayed Reporting and Trauma

Many survivors delay reporting due to shock, shame, fear, or not fully understanding what happened until years later. California law now recognizes this reality and provides extended timelines for sexual abuse claims.

‍

Why These Lawsuits Matter

For survivors, these cases are about two things:

• Justice and compensation for the emotional, physical, and psychological harm suffered
  
• Accountability and reform, so future patients are better protected

California law allows survivors to hold hospitals accountable when institutional negligence is a substantial factor in their harm. These cases make clear that responsibility does not stop with the individual physician.

Hospitals have a legal duty to act when risks are foreseeable. When they do not, they can be held accountable for ignoring patients’ rights.

‍

Moving Forward

The lawsuits involving Dr. Brock and Cedars-Sinai highlight the profound harm that can occur when medical institutions fail to listen, investigate, and protect patients. It is their DUTY to protect you, and when they don’t, someone should speak up.

For survivors, understanding this institutional role can be validating. What happened was not your fault. You trusted a system that was supposed to protect you.

California law provides meaningful paths to accountability for survivors of medical sexual abuse. Navigating these cases is complex, especially when institutions and long timelines are involved. 

Law firms like The McGrath Kavinoky LLP play an important role in helping survivors understand their rights, evaluate institutional responsibility, and pursue justice in a careful, trauma-informed way.

If you believe you were harmed while receiving medical care, you deserve answers, support, and the opportunity to be heard. Contact us today, and we can have one of our professional, female representatives reach out to discuss your experience. 

‍