Strass v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Mid-Atlantic

Unlike my colleagues in the majority, I find myself in substantial agreement with the written opinion of the trial judge, Honorable Patricia A. Wynn, in which she set aside the verdict in Ms. Strass’ favor and held that Kaiser was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.1 For some of the reasons stated by Judge Wynn, and for the additional reasons set forth below, I respectfully dissent.

I

BREACH OF CONTRACT

I begin, as did the trial judge, with a consideration of Ms. Strass’ claim for breach of contract. Ms. Strass asserts that Kaiser’s Personnel Policy Manual imposed a contractual obligation…