Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Wang v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Ass'n
Citation: 55 F. App'x 802Docket: No. 01-16038; D.C. No. CV-00-00541-HG/BMK
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; January 1, 2003; Federal Appellate Court
Appellant E. Blossom Wang, M.D. initiated a lawsuit against Hawaii Medical Service Association (HMSA) and Blue Cross Blue Shield Association (BCBSA), claiming violations of her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The district court dismissed Wang's Second Amended Complaint against BCBSA and granted summary judgment in favor of HMSA, deeming Wang's cross-motion for summary judgment moot and dismissing the case entirely. The appellate court affirmed the district court's decisions, noting that there were no disputed material facts and Wang did not demonstrate the necessary state action to support her constitutional claims. It was determined that HMSA is not a state actor, and its interactions with the government do not meet the criteria for state action as outlined in relevant case law. Wang's payments to HMSA were voluntary and not equivalent to compelled dues or fees, as seen in precedent cases. The court also found BCBSA's motion to dismiss appropriate since Wang’s complaint did not sufficiently allege that BCBSA was a state actor nor that it compelled her to join or pay for a health plan. The relationship between BCBSA and HMSA was distinguished from that of unions to labor organizations, further solidifying the dismissal. The judgment of the district court was thus affirmed, with the disposition not intended for publication or citation in future cases, per Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.