U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, 2003

Price v. Humana Insurance

Price v. Humana Insurance
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Decided June 11, 2003 · Barkett, Fay, Winter
333 F.3d 1247; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 11615; 2003 WL 21349954 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Price v. Humana Insurance

Opinion of the Court

*1248ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before BARKETT, FAY and WINTER *, Circuit Judges. BARKETT, Circuit Judge:

This case comes to us on remand from the Supreme Court of the United States, see PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc. v. Book, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 1531, 1536, 155 L.Ed.2d 578 (2003), reversing, in part, our decision in In re Humana Inc. Managed Care Litigation, 285 F.3d 971 (11th Cir. 2002). In Humana, we, inter alia, affirmed the district court’s finding that the defendant managed-health-care organizations’ arbitration clauses, which specifically prohibited punitive damages, were unenforceable because they precluded the recovery of treble damages under the Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. See In re Humana, 285 F.3d at 973. In affirming the district court, we refused to compel arbitration of the RICO claims. See id. The Supreme Court reversed, concluding that “since we do not know how the arbitrator will construe the [arbitration clauses’] remedial limitations, the questions [of] whether they render the parties’ agreements unenforceable and whether it is for courts or arbitrators to decide enforceability in the first instance are unusually abstract [and, therefore,] the proper course is to compel arbitration.” PacifiCare, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. at 1536. Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND to the district court with instructions for further proceedings in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in PacifiCare. Id.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.