Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T22:40:55.416Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recent Developments in Health Law: Wrongful Life: An Issue of First Impression for the Supreme Court of South Carolina — Willis v. Wu

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Nicholas Beshara
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
JLME Column
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 33 , Issue 3 , Fall 2005 , pp. 616 - 624
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Willis v. Wu, 607 S.E.2d 63 (S.C. 2004).Google Scholar
Id. at 71.Google Scholar
Id. at 66.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
See id. at 68.Google Scholar
Id. at 70.Google Scholar
Id. at 71.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Blake v. Cruz, 698 P.2d 315, 321 (Idaho 1984).Google Scholar
Willis, 607 S.E.2d at 69.Google Scholar
Berman v. Allan, 404 A.2d 8, 12 (NJ, 1979).Google Scholar
See id. at 12–13.Google Scholar
Id. at 12.Google Scholar
Willis, 607 S.E.2d at 71.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Blake, 698 P.2d at 322.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Turpin v. Sortini, 643 P.2d 954, 963–64 (CA, 1982).Google Scholar
Id. at 965–66.Google Scholar
Id. at 964.Google Scholar
Harbeson v. Parke-Davis, Inc., 656 P.2d 483, 495 (WA, 1983).Google Scholar
Procanik v. Cillo, 478 A.2d 755, 762 (NJ, 1984).Google Scholar
Willis, 607 S.E.2d at 71.Google Scholar
Id. at 71.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 67, n.2.Google Scholar
See id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Turpin, 643 P.2d at 962–63.Google Scholar

References

Empire HealthChoice Assurance, Inc. v. McVeigh, 396 F.3d 136, 140 (2d Cir. 2005).Google Scholar
The Federal Employees Health Benefits Act directs the U.S. Office of Personnel Management to contract with health insurance plans to provide healthcare benefits for federal employees throughout the United States. See 5 U.S.C. § 8902(a)(2004).Google Scholar
Empire HealthChoice Assurance provides health insurance to enrollees in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut and is a licensee of the BlueCross and BlueShield Association. “About Empire,” at <http://www.empireblue.com/about_empire/index.shtml> (last visited May 15, 2005).+(last+visited+May+15,+2005).>Google Scholar
Empire HealthChoice Assurance, Inc. v. McVeigh, 2003 WL 22171693 at 5 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 18, 2003).Google Scholar
Empire HealthChoice, 396 F.3d at 140.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 140–41 (citing Boyle v. United Techs. Corp., 487 U.S. 500, 507, 508 [1988].Google Scholar
Id. at 141.Google Scholar
Id. (citing Woodward Governor Co. v. Curtiss-Writing Flight Sys., Inc., 164 F.3d 123, 126 [2d Cir. 1999]).Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 141–42 (citing American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens, 513 U.S. 219, 233 n. 8 [1995]).Google Scholar
Id. at 143 n.4.Google Scholar
Id. at 143.Google Scholar
Id. The preemption clause states: “The terms of any contract under this chapter which relate to the name, provision, or extent of coverage or benefits (including payments with respect to benefits) shall supersede and preempt any State or local law, or any regulation issued thereunder, which relates to health insurance or plans.” 5 U.S.C. § 8902(m)(1) (2004).Google Scholar
Id. In so deciding, the court rejected Empire's argument that the contract terms constitute law.Google Scholar
These two conditions are: (1) when the contract terms under the FEHBA in question “relate to the nature, provision, or extent of coverage or benefits” and (2) when state laws “relate to health insurance or plans.” Id. at 146.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 156 (Raggi, J. dissenting).Google Scholar
Id. at 148. The Court specifically applied the reasoning set forth in American Airlines v. Wolens, 513 U.S. 219, 232 (1995) (ERISA “channel[s] civil actions into the federal courts, under a comprehensive scheme detailed in the legislation, designed to promote prompt and fair claims settlement”). Id. at 149.Google Scholar
Id. at 149, 145 n.7.Google Scholar
See Marshall, K. L., “Understanding Merrell Dow: Federal Question Jurisdiction for State-Federal Question Jurisdiction for State-Federal Hybrid Cases” Washington University Law Quarterly 77 (1999): 219, 227–37 (discussing how the Tenth, Third, and Fourth Circuits differ in their analysis of the FEHBA preemption provision.); see also Sallusti, M. P., “The Federal Employees Health Benefits Act (FEHBA): Why the Oklahoma Supreme Court Was Wrong in Allowing State Claims in Kincade v. Group Health Services,” Oklahoma Law Review 52 (1999): 273, 273–289.Google Scholar
Blue Cross & Blue Shield v. Cruz, 396 F.3d 793, 798–99 (7th Cir. 2005). The facts in Cruz are very similar to those in Empire Healthchoice, as Blue Cross & Blue Shield sued the federally-employed insured for reimbursement of paid benefits after the insured received a money judgment. Id. at 795–96.Google Scholar
Id. at 798–99 (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 1050374 at 9 (1998)). The Second Circuit acknowledged a similar interpretation of Congressional intent, but failed to read the 1998 amendment as lessening the requirement of showing a specific conflict with state law. See Empire HealthChoice, 396 F.3d at 156 (Raggi, J. dissenting).Google Scholar
Cruz, 396 F.3d at 799.Google Scholar
Botsford v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mont, Inc., 314 F.3d 390, 393 (9th Cir. 2002) (noting that the FEHBA preemption provision closely resembles the ERISA preemption provision). Judge Raggi discussed this case in her dissent. Empire HealthChoice, 396 F.3d at 156.Google Scholar
Botsford, 314 F.3d at 394; Cruz, 396 F.3d at 797.Google Scholar
Empire Health Choice, 396 F.3d at 143.Google Scholar
Bryan v. Office of Personnel Mgmt., 163 F.3d 1315, 1320 (10th Cir. 1999).Google Scholar
Cruz, 396 F.3d at 801.Google Scholar
See Marshall, , supra note 23, at 230. Insurers like to keep actions in federal court because there is generally less hostility towards business, more uniform interpretation of federal law, and a perception of greater competency in the federal courts as compared to state courts. Id.Google Scholar

References

George H. Lanier Memorial Hospital v. Andrews, 2004 WL 2634298 (AL, November 19, 2004).Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at *1.Google Scholar
Id. at *1.Google Scholar
Id. at *1-*2.Google Scholar
Id. at *2.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at *3.Google Scholar
George H. Lanier Memorial Hospital v. Andrews, 809 So.2d. 802 (AL, 2001).Google Scholar
Lanier Memorial Hospital, 2004 WL 2634298 at *3.Google Scholar
Id. at *4.Google Scholar
Ala. Code § 6-5-548(a) (2004).Google Scholar
Lanier Memorial Hospital, 2004 WL 2634298 at *4.Google Scholar
Id. at *5.Google Scholar
Ala. Code § 22-19-142(a).Google Scholar
Id. § 22-19-143.Google Scholar
Andrews v. Alabama Eye Bank, 727 So.2d 62, 65 (AL, 1999) (quoting Nicoletta v. Rochester Eye & Human Parts Bank, Inc., 519 N.Y.S.2d 928 [N.Y. Sup.Ct. 1987].Google Scholar
Lanier Memorial Hospital, 2004 WL 2634298 at *6.Google Scholar
Ala. Code § 6-5-484(a).Google Scholar
Lanier Memorial Hospital, 2004 WL 2634298 at *4 (citing Thomasson v. Diethelm, 457 So.2d 397 [AL, 1984].Google Scholar
Id. at *4 (citing Taylor v. Smith, 2004 WL 473322 [AL, March 12, 2004].Google Scholar
Id. at *5.Google Scholar
Id. at 5-*6.Google Scholar
Id. at *6.Google Scholar
Id. at *7 (citing Beasley v. MacDonald Eng’g Co., 249 So.2d 844, 846 [1971].Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at *8.Google Scholar
Id. at *8-*9.Google Scholar
Id. at *9.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at *10.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Ala. Code § 22-19-140(c) (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Further, in a case dealing with unauthorized harvesting of corneas for organ donation, the Ninth Circuit held that the right of next of kin to possess the bodies of their deceased family members created a property interest, the deprivation of which must be accorded due process of law. See Newman v. Sathyavaglswaran, 287.Google Scholar

References

Woodruff v. Covington, 389 F.3d 1117, 1129 (10th Cir. 2004).Google Scholar
Id. at 1119.Google Scholar
25 U.S.C.S §1660b(a) (2004).Google Scholar
The United States of America was properly named as defendant for Carl Albert Hospital. Woodruff, 389 F.3d at 1120 n.1.Google Scholar
Id. at 1119.Google Scholar
28 U.S.C.S. §1346(b)(1) (2004).Google Scholar
United States v. Orleans, 425 U.S. 807, 813 (1976).Google Scholar
Id. at 815.Google Scholar
Woodruff, 389 F.3d at 1128.Google Scholar
Id. at 1127.Google Scholar
Id. at 1128.Google Scholar
Id. at 1127–28.Google Scholar
25 U.S.C.S. §1660b(a) (2004); Woodruff 389 F.3d at 1128–29.Google Scholar
Woodruff, 389 F.3d at 1129.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. at 1128–29 (quoting Lane v. Pena, 518 U.S. 187, 192 (1996)); United States v. Nordic Village, 503 U.S. 30, 33–34 (1992).Google Scholar
Woodruff, 389 F.3d at 1128 (citing 42 U.S.C.S. §233(g)-(k) where FTCA coverage was expressly extended to eligible community health center employees, specifying them as Public Health Service employees when following certain policies and purposes).Google Scholar
Miller v. United States, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14722, at *12–13 (N.D. IL. November 5, 1990).Google Scholar
Id. at *9–10.Google Scholar
Bird v. United States, 949 F.2d 1079, 1086–89 (10th Cir. 1990).Google Scholar
Id. at 1086.Google Scholar
See Woodruff, 389 F.3d at 1127; See also Bird, 949 F.2d at 1085 (stating that the professional responsibilities of physicians are distinguished as being reserved from outside control or supervision, regardless of their status as employees or independent contractors); Miller, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14722 at *11 (stating that the roles of physician and nurse are distinguished, with physicians exercising medical judgment and nurses assisting in administration of the medical judgment).Google Scholar
Delvalle v. Sanchez, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1254, 1272 (S.D. FL. 2001).Google Scholar
Id. at 1265.Google Scholar
Id. at 1266.Google Scholar
Id. at 1265.Google Scholar
Id. at 1267.Google Scholar
Id. at 1268.Google Scholar
See Orleans, 425 U.S. at 815; Woodruff, 389 F.3d at 1129; Bird, 949 F.2d at 1089; Miller, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14722 at *12–13; Delvalle, 170 F. Supp. 2d at 1272.Google Scholar
See Woodruff, 389 F.3d at 1127–28.Google Scholar
Id. at 1127.Google Scholar
Id. at 1127.Google Scholar
Delvalle, 170 F. Supp. 2d at 1267–68.Google Scholar