Hale

Hale v. Sharp Healthcare

Good Law
108 Cal. Rptr. 3d 669·183 Cal. App. 4th 1373·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 530
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 19, 2010D054637California5,099 words

Opinion

Opinion

McCONNELL, J.

This is a putative class action by Dagmar Hale against Sharp Healthcare and Sharp Grossmont Hospital (together Sharp) for violation of the unfair competition law (UCL) (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.), violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) (Civ. Code, § 1750 et seq.), breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Hale’s theory is that Sharp deceptively and unfairly charged her and other uninsured patients fees for medical services that substantially exceeded the fees it accepted from patients covered by Medicare or private insurance. Hale appeals a judgment of dismissal entered after the court sustained without leave to amend Sharp’s demurrer to her second amended complaint (SAC). We conclude the court erred by sustaining the demurrer to the UCL and CLRA causes of action, as the SAC sufficiently alleges Hale’s standing, but properly sustained the demurrer to the contract causes of action. Further, the court did not abuse its discretion by denying Hale’s motion for reconsideration or leave to amend the contract causes of action. We reverse the judgment insofar as it pertains to the UCL and CLRA causes of action. We…

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.