Cruz

Cruz v. PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc.

Bad Law
111 Cal. Rptr. 2d 395·91 Cal. App. 4th 1179
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 31, 2001A093002California3,970 words

Opinion

Opinion

PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc., and its subsidiary, PacifiCare of California (collectively PacifiCare), appeal from an order denying their motion to compel arbitration of the claims asserted in Jose E. Cruz's unfair business practices complaint. PacifiCare contends that all Cruz's claims are subject to arbitration and, in the alternative, if some are not, that judicial proceedings should be stayed pending arbitration of those that are.

Cruz filed a class action against PacifiCare alleging violations of Business and Professions Code sections 17200 (unfair competition) and 17500 (false advertising) and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA; Civ.Code, § 1750 et seq.), as well as unjust enrichment. The gravamen of his complaint is that undisclosed financial incentives to PacifiCare's providers significantly reduce the quality of health care its patients receive.

PacifiCare moved to compel arbitration of Cruz's claims pursuant to the arbitration clause in its health plan agreement with his employer [1] and the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA; 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.). After a hearing, the trial court denied the motion to compel arbitration. PacifiCare filed a timely notice of…

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.