This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Contracts
Breach of Contract
Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

IV Solutions Inc. v. Takecare Insurance Company Inc., and Does 1 through 25, inclusive

Published: Oct. 25, 2014 | Result Date: Jan. 8, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:13-cv-04592-JFW-MAN Summary Judgment –  Defense

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jack A. Janov
(Kennaday, Leavitt & Owensby PC)

Andrew H. Selesnick
(Buchalter)

Kelly M. Hagemann
(Michelman & Robinson LLP)

Kevin R. Warren


Defendant

Nathanial J. Wood
(Crowell & Moring LLP)

Jennifer S. Romano
(Crowell & Moring LLP)


Facts

IV Solutions Inc. sued TakeCare Insurance Company Inc.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
IV Solutions alleged that A.H. was insured by TakeCare and that TakeCare requested IV Solutions to provide medication and services to A.H., who had a serious heath condition and needed home infusion of medication, as well as nursing and physical therapy services. IV Solutions also alleged that it provided the services to A.H. pursuant to a contract with TakeCare, but that TakeCare only paid a portion of IV Solutions claims for payment and failed to pay the remaining amounts owed, thereby breaching the contract.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
TakeCare argued that it was only required to pay the reasonable value of the goods and services provided by IV solutions and that IV Solutions charges for Daptomycin, which were 40 times the average wholesale price, were unreasonable compared to the industry average.

Result

The court granted TakeCare's motion for summary judgment and denied IV Solutions motion for summary judgment. The court found the contract did not specify the rates or amounts that IV Solutions would charge for its drugs, but that IV Solutions was required to exercise its discretion in good faith and charge the reasonable value of Daptomycin. The court held that TakeCare paid IV Solutions the reasonable value for the drugs and services provided and did not breach the contract.

Other Information

IV Solutions appealed defendant TakeCare's motion for summary judgment to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. While the matter was on appeal, the parties reached a settlement to the satisfaction of all parties. FILING DATE: June 25, 2013.


#122487

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390