In Zavala v. Arce (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 915, plaintiff sought emotional distress damages from her obstetrician for the death of her infant in utero. ( Zavala, supra, 58 Cal.App.4th at p. 919.) Defendant moved for summary judgment, submitting a declaration of an expert witness that the care and treatment were appropriate. Although plaintiff presented an opposing declaration of an expert that care and treatment were below the standard of care, the defendant argued that the opposing expert's declaration was insufficient because it "did not state an opinion as to the cause of death of the fetus . . . ." ( Id. at p. 935.) The Court of Appeal rejected this argument, concluding that "there was sufficient additional evidence from which the trier of fact could reasonably find that but for such negligence by the doctor in failing to induce labor the baby would not have died, " including that the baby was still alive at the time of an earlier sonogram that reflected low amniotic fluid and that the baby died due to an abrupt umbilical cord compression. ( Id. at pp. 935-936.)