Legal Opinion

Rodriguez v. Blue Cross of California

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 23, 2008No. B194066PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

COOPER, P. J.

Health and Safety Code section 1363.1 governs required disclosures in health care service plans when binding arbitration is included as a contract term. The purpose of section 1363.1 “is to protect health care consumers from the consequences of unknowingly waiving their right to a jury trial.” (Malek v. Blue Cross of California (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 44, 71 [16 Cal.Rptr.3d 687] (Malek).) The trial court denied Blue Cross of California and BC Life & Health Insurance Company’s petition to compel arbitration, finding that the disclosure in the individual enrollment…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Brown v. Kelly Broadcasting Co.California Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Robertson v. Health Net of California, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2005
  3. Kobzoff v. Los Angeles County Harbor/UCLA Medical CenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Malek v. Blue Cross of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
  5. People v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. McAllister v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  2. Baglione v. Health Net of Cal.California Court of Appeal · 2023
  3. Siopes v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc..Hawaii Supreme Court · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API