Peacehealth

Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealth

Good Law
515 F.3d 973·2008 WL 269475
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 31, 200805-35627, 05-35640, 05-36153, 05-36202California2,997 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gould, J.

ORDER CERTIFYING QUESTION TO THE SUPREME COURT OF OREGON

ORDER

McKenzie-Willamette Hospital (“McKenzie”) filed a complaint in the district court against PeaceHealth asserting seven claims for relief, two of which arose under Oregon state law for price discrimination and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. The jury found in McKenzie’s favor on both of the Oregon state law claims, and Peace- Health appealed. Since the jury’s verdict, an intervening U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209 , 113 S.Ct. 2578 , 125 L.Ed.2d 168 (1993), has injected uncertainty into the status of Oregon’s price discrimination doctrine. Because McKenzie’s price discrimination claim raises an important, dispositive issue of Oregon law, we respectfully certify a question for review by the Supreme Court of Oregon, pursuant to Or.Rev.Stat. § 28.200, namely whether Oregon price discrimination law follows the requirements as the U.S. Supreme Court delineated in Brooke Group. We offer the following statement of relevant facts and explanation of the “nature of the controversy in which the question[ ] arose.” Or.Rev.Stat. § 28.210(2)…

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.