Toledo v. Kaiser Permanente Medical Group

Good Law
987 F. Supp. 1174·1997 WL 425483·1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3941
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 12, 1997C-96-20363 SWCalifornia3,022 words

Opinion

Opinion

Williams, J.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MO- . TION TO REMAND TO STATE COURT; GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY ACTION

Plaintiffs ask this Court to remand their case to state court, arguing that ERISA does not preempt their state law claims. For the reasons set forth below, this Court DENIES Plaintiffs’ motion. In addition, Defendants ask this Court to compel arbitration and stay the proceeding pursuant to an arbitration clause in the health care agreement signed by Mr. Toledo. For the reasons set forth below, this Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and STAYS this proceeding.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs Loma and Rudy Toledo are members of Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. (“Health Plan”), a non-profit health maintenance organization licensed under the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act, Cal. Health & Safety Code § 1340 et seq., and federally qualified under the Health Maintenance Organization Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300e et seq. Plaintiffs have sued Health Plan and its contracting providers, the Per-manente Medical Group, Inc. (provider of medical services), and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (provider of hospital services), (collectively “Kaiser” or…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.