Sacred Heart Health Systems v. Humana Military Healthcare Services: May Plaintiffs Be Properly Certified as a Class Pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3) in the Absence of a Standard Form Contract?
In a recent decision, Sacred Heart Health Systems v. Humana Military Healthcare Services, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court's certification of a class of healthcare providers under Rule 23(b)(3). The Eleventh Circuit based its decision to reverse the district cou...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The American journal of trial advocacy 2011-04, Vol.34 (3), p.669 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | In a recent decision, Sacred Heart Health Systems v. Humana Military Healthcare Services, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court's certification of a class of healthcare providers under Rule 23(b)(3). The Eleventh Circuit based its decision to reverse the district court upon two major lines of analysis: (1) whether the variation in the terms of the contracts overwhelmed any common questions, and (2) whether the great amount of extrinsic evidence relevant to Humana's liability, as well as the law of the six states governing extrinsic evidence, overwhelmed any common questions. Here, Drake focuses on the court's first line of reasoning regarding variations in contractual terms in the context of Rule 23(b)(3) class actions in both this case and other decisions. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0160-0281 |