Sutter Health Uninsured Pricing Cases

Good Law
171 Cal. App. 4th 495·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 208·89 Cal. Rptr. 3d 615
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 2009C054983California6,902 words

Opinion

Opinion

Morrison, J.

Lawyers with an apparently weaker case attempted to intervene in an apparently stronger class action case. The trial court denied the motion to intervene and overruled objections to the proposed settlement.

In the apparently stronger case, a class of uninsured patients sued Sutter Health, alleging that it improperly denied them the discounts it granted insured patients. After much pretrial skirmishing and massive discovery, a retired judge (Hon. Coleman Fannin) mediated a settlement representing nearly a complete victory for the plaintiffs, including attorney fees.

Michael Stowers had filed a separate suit, eventually purporting to represent a class of accident victims unfairly billed by Sutter Health. Although liability has not been determined, the record provides objectively sound reasons why Sutter Health could conclude that Stowers had a weak case, if any. Therefore, Sutter Health did not choose to negotiate any settlement with him or his purported class.

When the uninsured case was about to settle, Stowers moved to intervene, and he and three purported uninsured class members, appellants Rachel Svenson, Javier Barnhart and Joseph Eustis, objected to the proposed…

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.