Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. v. Superior Court

Good Law
137 Cal. Rptr. 3d 741·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 138·203 Cal. App. 4th 696·2012 WL 473092
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 15, 2012No. B233759California7,672 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Zelon, J.

INTRODUCTION

Anna Rahm and her parents, Lynnette and James Rahm, filed a complaint against Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., and two Kaiser health care *699 providers. The complaint alleged that defendants had devised an insurance compensation scheme that induced Kaiser’s physicians to deny costly medical services to plan members. Plaintiffs asserted that, as a result of the scheme, Kaiser’s health care providers had improperly delayed an MRI for Anna, resulting in significant injuries. The complaint included four causes of action against each defendant and sought punitive damages for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Defendants filed a motion to strike the punitive damages allegations arguing that plaintiffs had failed to comply with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 425.13, subdivision (a). The trial court ruled that statute did not apply to plaintiffs’ punitive damages claims and denied the motion.

Defendants filed a petition for writ of mandate seeking an order directing the superior court to grant the motion to strike. We summarily denied the petition and defendants…

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.