Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Banner Health v. Medical Savings Insurance

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided August 14, 2007No. 1 CA-CV 05-0432Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKessler, Presiding Judge

¶ 29 I respectfully dissent in part and concur in part. I believe the superior court and the majority err by holding that Banner’s respective chargemaster rates on file with DHS (“the filed rates”) were incorporated into the Condition of Admission forms (“COAs”) that did not explicitly refer to those rates. Additionally, while I agree that the filed rates were properly incorporated into those COAs that referred to the filed rates, I believe that the majority and the superior court err by declining to address whether those rates are unconscionable contract terms. I would reverse the court’s…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Darner Motor Sales, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Doe v. HCA Health Services of Tennessee, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Maxwell v. Fidelity Financial Services, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Broemmer v. Abortion Services of Phoenix, Ltd.Arizona Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Cronin v. SheldonArizona Supreme Court · 1999

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

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

Powered by the Exa API