Case: Adventist Healthcare, Inc. v. Steven S. Behram, No. 16, September Term, 2023.
Issue: The issue revolves around the interpretation of a confidential settlement agreement between a hospital (Adventist Healthcare, Inc.) and a physician (Dr. Steven S. Behram). The hospital was required to submit a report to a regulatory authority using specific language agreed upon in the settlement. However, the physician alleged that the hospital selected codes that contradicted the agreed language in the report, thus breaching the agreement.
Decision: The Supreme Court disagreed with the lower court’s decision to award summary judgment to the hospital. They concluded that a reasonable person in the position of the parties would have understood that the hospital’s obligation to use specific language in its report precluded it from also including contradictory language. Whether the added language constituted a breach was deemed a jury question. The court also agreed with the lower court that the physician’s claim that the hospital failed to provide a timely hearing was released in the settlement agreement.
Relevance: This case is relevant for clients researching how courts interpret contracts, the importance of clear and precise language in settlement agreements, and the potential consequences of deviating from agreed language. The case also underscores the importance of understanding the implications of release clauses, as they can potentially relinquish one’s right to future claims related to the agreement.
Faith At Law LLC 