Legal Opinion · Dissent

Yana Anderson v. Ochsner Health System and Ochsner Clinic Foundation

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided July 1, 2014No. 2013-CC-2970Published

1DissentGuidry, Justice

LI respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding that the legislature intended, albeit implicitly, to allow a private right of action under the Health Care and Consumer Billing and Disclosure Protection Act, La.Rev.Stat. 22:1871 et seq. (more com*587monly referred to as the “Balance Billing Act”). In my view, the majority inordinately focuses on what the legislature did not do, that is expressly disallow a private right of action, rather than on what the legislature actually did. There is no doubt that the legislature perceived a problem with improper billing practices and sought to prohibit…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Associated Motors, Inc. v. BurkLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1929
  2. Borden-Aicklen Auto Supply Co. v. Folse Service StationLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1927
  3. Cheramie Services, Inc. v. Shell Deepwater Production, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2010
  4. Voltolina v. St. Tammany Fire Dist. 12Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2007
  5. Monier v. St. Charles Parish School BoardLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API