Case Information
*0 FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON SEAN F. M C Jun 23, 2025 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON CAROLINE ANGULO, a single person; ERIC Nos. 4:25-CV-05029-SAB
KELLER, a single person; EBEN NESJE, a 4:24-CV-05160-SAB
single person; KIRK SUMMERS, a single 4:25-CV-05025-SAB
person; CHRISTINE BASH, individually and
as a personal representative of THE ESTATE ORDER CONSOLIDATING
OF STEVEN BASH; RAYMOND SELLS , GOOLD , AND
SUMERLIN, JR., and MARYANN ANGULO , FOR THE
SUMERLIN, a married couple; and MARTIN PURPOSE OF
WHITNEY and SHERRYL WHITNEY, a CONSIDERING CLASS
married couple, CERTIFICATION
Plaintiffs, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated,
v.
PROVIDENCE HEALTH & SERVICES
WASHINGTON, a non-profit Washington
Corporation, also d/b/a/ PROVIDENCE ST.
MARY MEDICAL CENTER; DR. JASON A.
DREYER, DO, and JANE DOE DREYER,
husband and wife and the marital community
thereof; and DR. DANIEL ELSKENS DO and
JANE DOE ELSKENS, husband and wife and the marital community thereof.
Defendants.
PHERN SELLS, a single person; DENNIS
HIGGINS and TRACY HIGGINS, husband
and wife; WILLIAM HAMBY and CYNDI
HAMBY, husband and wife; and DANIEL
WHEELER,
Plaintiffs,
v.
PROVIDENCE ST. JOSEPH HEALTH;
PROVIDENCE HEALTH & SERVICES;
PROVIDENCE HEALTH AND SERVICES
— WASHINGTON d/b/a PROVIDENCE ST.
MARY MEDICAL CENTER; and
PROVIDENCE MEDICAL GROUP d/b/a
PROVIDENCE MEDICAL GROUP
SOUTHEAST WASHINGTON
NEUROSURGERY, a/k/a PMG
NEUROSCIENCE INSTITUTE, WALLA
WALLA a/k/a NEUROSCIENCE
INSTITUTE d/b/a PROVIDENCE; and JANE
AND JOHN DOES 1–6,
Defendants. TRADEEN GOOLD; CAL ALVIN HARRIS
and MIDGE HARRIS, husband and wife;
CHRISTINA COLE and MARCUS COLE,
wife and husband; JEFFERY NEHLS and
MELISSA NEHLS, husband and wife;
SANDEE HAHN and STEPHEN HAHN, wife
and husband,
Plaintiffs,
v.
DR. JASON A. DREYER, DO, and LAURA
DREYER, husband and wife and the marital
community thereof; PROVIDENCE ST.
JOSEPH HEALTH; PROVIDENCE HEALTH
& SERVICES; PROVIDENCE HEALTH
AND SERVICES — WASHINGTON d/b/a
PROVIDENCE ST. MARY MEDICAL
CENTER; and PROVIDENCE MEDICAL
GROUP d/b/a PROVIDENCE MEDICAL
GROUP SOUTHEAST WASHINGTON
NEUROSURGERY, a/k/a PMG
NEUROSCIENCE INSTITUTE, WALLA
WALLA a/k/a NEUROSCIENCE
INSTITUTE d/b/a PROVIDENCE; and JANE
AND JOHN DOES 1–6,
Defendants.
Before the Court are Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or Stay, ECF No. 27, in Sells et al v. Providence St. Joseph Health et al [4:24-CV-05160-SAB]; and
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, First to File, ECF No. 21, in Goold et al v. Dreyer
et al [4:25-CV-05025-SAB]. The motions were considered without oral argument.
In Sells et al v. Providence St. Joseph Health et al [4:24-CV-05160-SAB], Plaintiffs are represented by William Gilbert, Ashley Richards, and Beth Bollinger.
Defendants are represented by Jennifer Oetter, Amber Pearce, Andrew Gard, and
Meryl Hulteng.
In Goold et al v. Dreyer et al [4:25-CV-05025-SAB], Plaintiffs are represented by Mr. Gilbert, Ms. Richards, and Ms. Bollinger. Defendant
Providence is represented by Jennifer Oetter and Andrew Gard. Defendants Dreyer
are represented by Jeffrey Galloway, Ryan Beaudoin, and Jon Burtard.
In Angulo et al v. Providence Health & Services Washington et al [4:25-CV- 05029-SAB], Plaintiffs are represented by Mr. Gilbert, Ms. Richards, Ms.
Bollinger, Peter Langrock, and Terrance Reed. Defendant Providence is
represented by Jennifer Oetter, Kenneth Payson, Ross Siler, and Caleah Whitten.
Defendants Dr. Dreyer and Jane Doe Dreyer are represented by Bryce Wilcox,
James McPhee, Mr. Galloway, Mr. Beaudoin, and Steven Dixson. Defendant Dr.
Elskens is represented by Ronald Van Wert and Stephen Lamberson.
The Court has considered the motions, briefs, and caselaw in Sells and Goold , as well as the related case Angulo . For docket management and judicial
efficiency, it now consolidates Sells , Goold , and Angulo , for the purpose of
considering the class certification issue presented in Angulo .
BACKGROUND The Angulo case was filed in King County Superior Court on May 13, 2022. On June 30, 2022, the Defendants timely removed the matter to the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Washington and pursuant to the Class Action
Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”) based on diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d) and § 1453. On March 19, 2025, it was transferred to the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Washington, because of several related pending
matters and in the interest of justice and judicial economy.
The Sells case was filed on December 4, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The Goold
case was filed on March 11, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Washington and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Plaintiffs in all cases seek recovery on several claims, most of which match or mirror the claims in the related cases. These include claims for: medical
negligence, in violation of Wash. Rev. Code § 7.70; lack of consent or informed
consent to medical procedures; criminal profiteering, pursuant to Wash. Rev. Code
§§ 9A.82.100 and 9A.82.080, with predicate acts, including for false health care
claims, pursuant to Wash. Rev. Code §§ 48.80.030 and 9A.08.020, money
laundering, pursuant to Wash. Rev. Code §§ 9A.83.020(1)(a)&(b), 9A.83.020(5),
and 9A.08.020, and theft by deception, pursuant to Wash. Rev. Code §§
9A.56.030, 9A.56.040, and 9A.08.020; violations of the Consumer Protection Act,
Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86, for deceptive or unfair practices in engaging in their
medical services; corporate and vicarious negligence; that Defendants deprived
Plaintiffs of their opportunity to discover the factual bases for the causes in
violation of the discovery rule; a breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and/or
misrepresentation; negligent infliction of emotional distress and outrage; loss of
consortium; vicarious liability; unjust enrichment; disgorgement; and limited
waiver of physician-patient privilege.
In Angulo , Plaintiffs further seek to certify two classes of plaintiffs, Providence Class and MultiCare Class:
(1) Providence Class: All surgical patients of the Doctors at Providence who were subject to the RVU compensation scheme in connection with their treatment.
(2) MultiCare Class: All surgical patients of Dr. Jason A. Dreyer, DO, while he was employed in Spokane, Washington, by MultiCare Health Systems, from May 3, 2019, through November 18, 2021. For the Providence Class, Plaintiffs allege the doctors had roughly 1,750 patients, which amounts to the same number of class members. For the MultiCare
Class, Plaintiffs allege roughly 475 surgical patients for Dr. Jason Dreyer, and thus
475 class members.
The allegations in these cases arise from care provided by Dr. Dreyer, Dr.
Daniel Elskens, and Defendant Providence at its location at St. Mary Medical
Center in Walla Walla, Washington, between 2013 and 2018. Plaintiffs allege
Defendants breached duties owed by providing unnecessary or inadequate care,
resulting in harm. The actions were allegedly driven by an incentive-based
compensation scheme prioritizing volume of surgeries over care. These surgeries
resulted in the individual harms suffered by each named plaintiff, in all three cases.
The issues came to a head in and relate to a March 17, 2022, settlement agreement in a qui tam False Claims Act action among Defendant Providence, the
United States, and the State of Washington. Providence agreed to pay the
government $22,690,458, with $10,459,388 earmarked as restitution, to resolve
allegations that the hospital fraudulently billed federal and state health care
programs for surgeries performed by Drs. Dreyer and Elskens at Providence St.
Mary Medical Center. Both doctors resigned in the face of Washington
Department of Health administrative investigations. But Dr. Dreyer started
practicing again at MultiCare Health System in Spokane, Washington. [1]
In the settlement agreement, the parties stipulated that between July 1, 2013, and November 13, 2018, Providence submitted claims and accepted reimbursement
from federal and state health care programs for neurosurgery and other services at
Providence St. Mary; that Providence employed Dr. Dreyer during that entire time
period and Dr. Elskens between November 2015 and May 2017; that Providence
paid the neurosurgeons in such a way as to encourage higher complexity surgeries
resulting in higher compensation; that Providence received and noted concerns
about the doctors’ procedures and their medical necessity; that Dr. Elskens was
placed on administrative leave in February 2017 and resigned in May 2017; that
Dr. Dreyer was placed on administrative leave in May 2018 and resigned in
November 2018; and that Providence did not report either doctor to the National
Practitioner Data Bank or Department of Health.
Providence did not admit to liability in the settlement agreement, though the United States and State of Washington found they had claims against Providence
for false claims and failure to take appropriate action with regards to the doctors’
actions.
LEGAL STANDARD
Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a) provides:
(a) Consolidation . If actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may:
(2) consolidate the actions; A district court considering similar cases at once may also exercise its broad discretion to consolidate matters. See Garity v. APWU Nat’l Labor Org. , 828 F.3d
848, 855–56 (9th Cir. 2016); see also Investor’s Rsch. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for
Cent. Dist. of Cal. , 877 F.2d 777, 777 (9th Cir. 1989).
DISCUSSION The Court finds consolidation appropriate for managing these three related matters and for the purposes of adjudicating the question of class certification. All
three cases involve patients who allegedly suffered harm from surgeries performed
and medical advice provided by Drs. Dreyer or Elskens, and that the doctors conducted these procedures unnecessarily because Defendant Providence operated
an incentive-based payment scheme. Further, the claims are nearly identical, or
identical, and they all involve Washington State or common law issues. Any
unique claims still relate to the same underlying facts and individual harms alleged.
In an exercise of its discretion, the Court finds consolidation will promote judicial economy by allowing the Court and parties to resolve the threshold
question of class certification, a resolution which will potentially impact all three
matters. See Garity , 828 F.3d at 855–56. Given that these cases share both
common issue of law and fact, the Court consolidates them pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 42(a). Following the resolution of class certification issue, the Court may
reopen the other matters, if necessary.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED :
1. Sells et al v. Providence St. Joseph Health et al [4:24-CV-05160- SAB]; Goold et al v. Dreyer et al [4:25-CV-05025-SAB]; and Angulo et al v.
Providence Health & Services Washington et al [4:25-CV-05029-SAB], are
CONSOLIDATED , for the purpose of resolving the issue of class certification .
2. The parties shall utilize case No. 4:25-CV-05029-SAB for any filings. 3. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or Stay, ECF No. 27, in Sells et al v. Providence St. Joseph Health et al [4:24-CV-05160-SAB], is DENIED .
a. Plaintiffs’ request to strike Defendants’ filing of Material Facts, noted in their Response at ECF No. 33, is DENIED . 4. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, First to File, ECF No. 21, in Goold et al v. Dreyer et al [4:25-CV-05025-SAB], is DENIED .
a. Plaintiffs’ request to strike Defendants’ filing of Material Facts, noted in their Response at ECF No. 25, is DENIED . //
//
// 5. The Clerk of Court shall ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE Sells et al v. Providence St. Joseph Health et al [4:24-CV-05160-SAB] AND Goold et al v.
Dreyer et al [4:25-CV-05025-SAB] until the issue of class certification is resolved.
a. All deadlines and hearings in Sells and Goold are STRICKEN . IT IS SO ORDERED . The District Court Clerk is hereby directed to enter this Order, provide copies to counsel, and administratively close Sells et al v.
Providence St. Joseph Health et al [4:24-CV-05160-SAB] AND Goold et al v.
Dreyer et al [4:25-CV-05025-SAB].
DATED this 23rd day of June 2025.
[1] MultiCare Health Systems is not a party in any of the matters here.