Kaiser-Georgetown Community Health Plan, Inc. v. Stutsman
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
491 A.2d 502 (1985)
- Written by Steven Gladis, JD
Facts
Mary Stutsman (plaintiff) claimed that she was injured while receiving medical treatment at a facility operated by Kaiser-Georgetown Community Health Plan, Inc. (Kaiser-Georgetown) (defendant). Stutsman was a resident of Virginia but was employed in the District of Columbia and was covered by Kaiser-Georgetown’s health-maintenance organization (HMO) by virtue of that employment. Kaiser-Georgetown was a District of Columbia entity but operated facilities in Virginia, including the facility at which Stutsman was treated. Virginia law imposed a damages cap on medical-malpractice actions. District of Columbia law did not. The trial court held that District of Columbia law should control. Kaiser-Georgetown appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mack, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.