Guthrie v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield
Decision Date | 28 August 1998 |
Citation | 773 So.2d 471 |
Parties | Winston GUTHRIE, D.M.D. v. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF ALABAMA. |
Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Robert R. Riley, Jr., Birmingham; and Daniel B. Banks, Jr., of Morris, Cloud & Conchin, Huntsville, for appellant.
Cavender C. Kimble and Tom S. Roper of Balch & Bingham, L.L.P., Birmingham, for appellee.
In November 1995, Winston Guthrie, D.M.D., sued Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama. Guthrie alleged that Blue Cross "asserted to its insureds [who were Guthrie's patients] and others that [Guthrie] was practicing dentistry outside the scope of his license." Guthrie also alleged that at the time Blue Cross made these statements, it knew that these "statements were false." Guthrie sought damages for libel, slander per se, and intentional interference with a business relationship.
Thereafter, Blue Cross filed a notice of removal from state circuit court to federal district court. In May 1997 the federal district court entered a partial summary judgment, granting Blue Cross's summary judgment motion "as to all claims that relate to ERISA, FEHBA, and PEEHIP plans." The district court remanded the remaining claims (which involved patients whose group health benefit plans were governed solely by state law) to the state circuit court. Jacqueline Reasoner and William Cantrell are the patients whose group health benefit plans are governed solely by state law.
After remand, Blue Cross moved for a summary judgment on the remaining claims. Blue Cross also filed a brief, affidavits, depositions, and other evidence in support of its motion. Guthrie filed a brief, affidavits, depositions, and other evidence in opposition. The circuit court granted Blue Cross's motion and entered a summary judgment for Blue Cross.
Guthrie appealed. Our supreme court has transferred this case to this court pursuant to § 12-2-7(6), Ala.Code 1975.
In August 1993 Blue Cross contacted the Board of Dental Examiners "regarding [Blue Cross's] concerns for the claims filed by [Guthrie]." The Board of Dental Examiners considered the information provided by Blue Cross, and, thereafter, the attorney for the Board of Dental Examiners sent a letter, dated October 27, 1993, advising Guthrie of the following:
In February 1994 the Board of Medical Examiners advised the Board of Dental Examiners that it had reviewed the information provided and was "in agreement with the Dental Board in that the activities of Dr. Guthrie which relate to the treatment of neurological problems and which involve neurological diagnoses, as reflected in the information reviewed, constitute the practice of medicine."
By a letter dated June 15, 1994, the Board of Dental Examiners advised Guthrie that it had considered the various materials Guthrie had submitted to the Board of Dental Examiners in response to its letter of October 27, 1993. The June 15, 1994, letter stated:
By a letter dated June 27, 1994, Guthrie responded to the Board of Dental Examiners' letter of June 15, 1994, by raising two points which he stated that he wished to clarify. In his letter, Guthrie asserted:
"Unless otherwise notified, I am assuming that the Board has no objections to my concerns and accepts these modifications so that I may continue to perform the protocols and procedures discussed at our May meeting and [that] these are within the scope of my licensure to practice dentistry in the State of Alabama."
In a letter dated July 11, 1994, the Board of Dental Examiners answered Guthrie's letter of June 27, 1994. The July 11, 1994, letter stated the following: The Board "stands by its June 15, 1994, letter," which "was clear and unambiguous" and that "if [Guthrie] insist[s] on interpreting the Board's letter in the manner set forth in [Guthrie's] letter [of June 27, 1994] or in any way inconsistent with the Board's opinion, [that Guthrie would] do so at [his] own risk." The Board of Dental Examiners "does not agree with nor does it accept [Guthrie's] interpretation of [§ 34-9-6, Ala.Code 1975,]" and Guthrie "should not assume that the Board has no objection to the `concerns' set out in [Guthrie's] letter nor should [Guthrie] assume that the Board accepts the `modifications' set forth in [his] letter." The July 11, 1994, letter also stated:
Blue Cross sent Guthrie a certified letter, dated February 28, 1995, which stated:
In a letter dated March 9, 1995, Guthrie responded to Blue Cross's letter, in the following manner: "I trust that you will... fully disclose to my patients, in writing, the rationale for your decision to deny payment of my services."
Thereafter, Blue Cross responded in writing to Reasoner and Cantrell's inquiries regarding the denial of coverage for Guthrie's services. In a letter dated August 15, 1995, Blue Cross advised Reasoner of the following:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
EX PARTE BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD
...claims. On Dr. Guthrie's appeal, the Court of Civil Appeals reversed the summary judgment and remanded. Guthrie v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Alabama, 773 So.2d 471 (Ala.Civ. App.1998). On certiorari review pursuant to the petition of Blue Cross, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Civ......