Broadmeadow Investment, LLC v. Delaware Health Resources Board
2012 Del. LEXIS 637
Del.2012Background
- Broadmeadow appeals a Superior Court dismissal for lack of standing to challenge HealthSouth’s CPR grant.
- HealthSouth sought a CPR to build a 34-bed freestanding rehabilitation hospital near Broadmeadow’s Middletown facility; Broadmeadow opposed.
- Board conducted hearings via a Review Committee; ultimately approved HealthSouth’s CPR with conditions in July 2011.
- Broadmeadow filed two Superior Court appeals; the court dismissed them as lacking standing under 16 Del. C. § 9305(8).
- The Supreme Court holds that § 9305(8) permits any aggrieved person to appeal the Board’s CPR decision, reversing the Superior Court.
- The case is remanded for merits proceedings consistent with this decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does § 9305(8) allow any aggrieved person to appeal? | Broadmeadow: statute silent; should permit any person to appeal. | Board/HealthSouth: only the applicant may appeal. | Yes; any aggrieved person has standing to appeal under § 9305(8). |
| Is the subsection title controlling in defining who may appeal? | Titles are not part of substantive law; should not dictate standing. | Title indicates appeal is for the applicant. | Titles are not controlling; standing is determined by pari materia construction of the statutory scheme. |
| Whether Broadmeadow is an aggrieved party with standing? | Broadmeadow is aggrieved as a competing provider in the same region. | Aggrieved status not satisfied unless statutorily limited to applicants. | Broadmeadow is an aggrieved party with standing under § 9305(8). |
| Should constitutional considerations be decided in this ruling? | Due process/open courts concerns support broad standing. | Constitutional issues are not necessary to decide here. | Unnecessary to address constitutional questions on the merits at this stage. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fiduciary Trust Co. v. Fiduciary Trust Co., 445 A.2d 927 (Del. 1982) (statutory standing requires aggrieved party)
- Friant v. Friant, 553 A.2d 1186 (Del. 1989) (utility of due process considerations in standing)
- Deposit Guaranty Nat’l Bank v. Roper, 445 U.S. 326 (U.S. 1980) (only a party aggrieved may appeal)
- Watson v. City of Newark, 746 F.2d 1008 (3d Cir. 1984) (federal appellate standing principles guiding state questions)