Kotler

Kotler v. PacifiCare of California

Good Law
126 Cal. App. 4th 950·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 210·2005 Daily Journal DAR 1713·24 Cal. Rptr. 3d 447·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1310
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 10, 2005B171654California2,468 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cooper, J.

Plaintiff, Steven Kotler, appeals from summary judgment granted to his health care service plan, PacifiCare of California (PacifiCare), and its parent corporation PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc. (PacifiCare Systems; collectively defendants), on claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The action arose out of delays plaintiff encountered in obtaining treatment for a debilitating illness, Lyme disease. We conclude that the judgment must be reversed.

FACTS

The evidence adduced by both sides on the motion for summary judgment disclosed the following scenario. Plaintiff is a freelance writer, who since 1997 was a member of PacifiCare, a health maintenance organization, which provides its members health care services through contracting doctors and hospitals. Under PacifiCare’s Subscriber Agreement (agreement), a member must choose a primary care physician, who directs and coordinates the member’s medical care, including referrals to specialists who are also participants in PacifiCare’s plan. In September 2000, plaintiff moved from Northern to Southern California, and was required to select a new primary care physician.…

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.