Dist. Ct. erred in dismissing plaintiff's action alleging that defendant violated Wisconsin statute (Wis. Stat. section 146.83(f)(b)) by charging fees that were greater than permissible fee schedule set forth in said statute, where Dist. Ct. found found that: (1) language in statute imposed duty to charge permissible fees only on "healthcare providers;" and (2) defendant was not healthcare provider, but was only agent of healthcare provider. As such, Dist. Ct. found that plaintiff could only sue defendant's principal, which was healthcare provider. However, subsequent to Dist. Ct.'s holding, Wisconsin Appellate Court expressly disagreed with Dist. Ct.'s analysis in instant case and found that agents of healthcare providers have no greater power to charge fees that were in excess of permissible fee schedule. While Ct. of Appeals noted that Dist. Ct. offered sound reasons for rejecting liability for healthcare records companies such as defendant, since, although agents may fulfill principal's duty under statute, it does not follow that agent must be liable for statutory violations, Ct. of Appeals nevertheless found that it was required to defer to Wisconsin Appellate Court's interpretation of instant Wisconsin statute under circumstances of instant case. Also, Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing plaintiff's unjust enrichment action, since plaintiff cannot seek equitable remedy, where she had remedy at law under Wisconsin statute.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Agency