Alpine Orthopaedic Specialists, LLC v. Intermountain Healthcare, Inc.
271 P.3d 174
Utah Ct. App.2012Background
- Alpine sued USU for breach of contract and IHC for intentional interference; district court granted summary judgment for USU and Alpine appealed.
- USU entered a 2001 personal service agreement with Alpine to provide team physician services; Dr. Finnoff was designated to provide those services.
- In 2004 IHC considered recruiting Finnoff to work for IHC, but the move never materialized and Finnoff remained with Alpine until 2005.
- In 2006 USU issued an RFP for the services after Alpine objected to nonrenewal; the CPO upheld USU’s decision, and Alpine did not timely appeal.
- USU eventually awarded the contract to IHC after the bidding process; Alpine claimed IHC interfered with the Agreement by recruiting Finnoff, but the district court found no genuine issue of material fact.
- The appellate court affirmed summary judgment for IHC, holding Alpine failed to show IHC caused USU’s RFP and award or injury; Alpine’s additional arguments were not preserved or proven.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IHC intentionally interfered with Alpine’s contract | Alpine argues IHC recruited Finnoff in 2004, causing USU to bid | IHC did not cause the RFP/award; no evidence of intentional interference | No genuine issue; IHC entitled to judgment as a matter of law |
| Whether IHC’s recruitment caused USU to issue the RFP | IHC recruitment influenced USU’s decision to bid | Undisputed facts show no causal link | No causal connection; Alpine failed to prove interference caused the RFP |
| Whether Alpine was injured by IHC’s actions | Interference injured Alpine by losing the contract | No evidence that recruitment caused USU to award to IHC | No evidence of injury; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether Alpine preserved arguments on improper means | IHC used improper means to recruit Finnoff | Argument not preserved; insufficient record | Not considered; Alpine waived improper means challenge |
| Whether the 56(f) request affected the outcome | Alpine sought more time for expert discovery | Court correctly denied 56(f) | Not necessary to address given resolution on other issues |
Key Cases Cited
- Ferguson v. Williams & Hunt, Inc., 2009 UT 49 (Utah Supreme Court, 2009) (elements of intentional interference; improper means if professional standard violated)
- Orvis v. Johnson, 177 P.3d 600 (Utah Supreme Court, 2008) (summary judgment standard and burden shifting)
- Waddoups v. Amalgamated Sugar Co., 54 P.3d 1054 (Utah Supreme Court, 2002) (nonmovant must present material facts to create genuine issue)
- Alpine Orthopaedic Specialists, LLC v. Utah State Univ., 263 P.3d 501 (Utah App. 2011) (appeal/notice issues regarding CPO decision and bid process)
- Overstock.com, Inc. v. SmartBargains, Inc., 192 P.3d 858 (Utah Supreme Court, 2008) (burden on party disputing summary judgment to present material facts)