HCA, Stein lawsuit schedule and governance set, judge defines document protections
ASHEVILLE – A North Carolina Business Court judge defined rules of the road for the lawsuit state Attorney General Josh Stein has brought against HCA Healthcare.
Prepare for a slow burn.
Stein, who is running for governor, sued HCA Dec. 14, alleging that the company did not provide the level of emergency and cancer care at Mission Hospital it agreed to when it purchased the system in 2019. The attorney general asked the court to demand HCA restore the emergency and oncology services to its pre-sale conditions. He also requests the court award any additional relief it deems fair.
HCA responded Feb. 13, saying that the company adhered to the contract, which did not require the hospital to comply with any quantity or quality standards. Stein's office filed a motion to dismiss HCA's counterclaims March 14, saying that the company's claims were "contradicted" by patient experience.
Both sides jointly submitted a Case Management Report Feb. 27. This filing, required by state rules, includes each party’s preference for case governance, including a timeline for discovery, schedule for depositions, mediation timing and a proposed trial schedule.
HCA and Stein disagreed over pace. Stein requested more time for discovery, for HCA to serve expert reports, prepare for deposition and trial. He proposed a trial that would begin April 2025 at the earliest, if attorneys filed at requested deadlines. HCA requested a late October trial date.
Defendants often want to put pressure on plaintiffs with an early trial date, Duke Law Professor Donald Beskind previously told the Citizen Times. He didn’t have an opinion on whether HCA was trying to squeeze Stein with its proposed schedule.
Mission Health spokesperson Nancy Lindell referred the Citizen Times to a March 1 statement: "We are confident in our compliance with the APA and are seeking to reach a resolution as soon as the Court agrees is reasonably possible."
Judge Julianna Theall Earp’s March 20 order sided more closely with Stein’s proposal. Earp ruled that motions filed after discovery will be due by March 10, 2025. This ruling solidifies that Stein will not preside over the case through its completion.
"Cases involving complex legal issues often take an extended period of time to resolve. In addition, cases often continue through leadership transitions – this is both routine and expected. The department has no reason to believe this case would be different from any of the other cases that will remain pending in courts throughout the country when Attorney General Stein’s term ends at the end of this year. The dedicated attorneys at NCDOJ intend to keep fighting this case as long as it takes to restore health care services to the level western North Carolinians expect and deserve," state attorney general's office spokesperson Nazneen Ahmed told the Citizen Times March 27.
The winner of the race for Attorney General will be responsible for the case. Democrat Rep. Jeff Jackson is battling Republican Rep. Dan Bishop for the position.
Earp did not set a trial date.
“The lack of a trial date usually means that the judge has no idea how long it will take to rule on the parties’ dispositive motions. The pacing generally seems consistent with what I have seen in other cases. Pacing often has to do with the court’s workload in addition to the parties’ preferences,” Beskind, who reviewed the order March 27, told the Citizen Times in an email.
Document protections defined
Earp submitted three other orders that day, which include rules for document production, protocol for electronically stored information as well as definitions and guidelines for protecting sensitive materials. Her orders almost completely reflect proposed rulings brokered by both parties.
Earp's ruling creates two levels of document sensitivity: “confidential information” and “highly confidential information.” Some information describing business practices, like specific plans for capacity expansion or reduction, will be considered highly confidential. Confidential information includes patient records.
Parties can only disclose this sensitive information to a select group defined by the court. Highly confidential information can only be disclosed to a narrower group. Frequently the court will require individuals who receive that information to sign an agreement binding them to secrecy within the provisions of the agreement. Any person or entity that produces information can designate part or all materials as confidential or highly confidential.
Transcripts of depositions will be treated as “highly confidential” for 30 days after a copy of the final deposition transcript is available to the deponent for review. During that period either party or the deponent can declare that the deposition is confidential or highly confidential.
Parties can challenge the designation of a document as confidential or highly confidential.
Earp allowed each of the parties to amend their pleadings by April 30, giving Stein a month to submit an amended complaint.
More: NC Attorney General says HCA lawsuit counterclaims 'flatly contradicted' by patients
More: Proposed schedule for HCA, Stein case released: Sides disagree over pacing, trial start
More: NC Attorney General Josh Stein sues HCA Healthcare and Mission Hospital
Case schedule
April 1: Mediator selected.
April 30: All motions to amend pleadings filed.
Sept. 30: Fact discovery and mediation complete.
Oct. 14: Expert reports provided by Stein.
Nov. 11: Expert reports provided by HCA.
Dec. 2: Rebuttal reports due.
Jan. 10, 2025: Expert witness discovery complete.
March 10, 2025: Post-discovery motions filed.
Mitchell Black covers Buncombe County and health care for the Citizen Times. Email him at mblack@citizentimes.com or follow him on Twitter @MitchABlack. Please help support local journalism with a subscription to the Citizen Times.
This article originally appeared on Asheville Citizen Times: NC judge sets schedule, defines document protections in Stein-HCA case
