Tredrea v. Anesthesia & Analgesia, P.C.

584 N.W.2d 276 (1998)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Ps were two of fifteen anesthesiologists on staff at Genesis as of October 1994. Seven of the other doctors were employees of D, which was a professional corporation of anesthesiologists organized as a group practice. Genesis decided to reorganize its system of employing anesthesiologists and decided to hire a group instead of individuals. Genesis contacted all fifteen anesthesiologists on its staff, explained the new model, and requested bids for contracts. Genesis signed the contract with D. Genesis could still offer contracts to independent anesthesiologists, including Ps, during a limited time period. D acknowledged that Genesis intended to offer to enter into agreements with those anesthesia providers who are performing anesthesia services at the Hospital as of the date of this Agreement and who to be identified on Schedule B of the Genesis-D agreement. Genesis was allowed to contract with the Independent Contractors to provide anesthesia services provided that such agreement shall, by no later than January 31, 1995. Ps and the other six on-staff independent anesthesiologists were told that D had been granted the exclusive contract and that any of them would be able to sign an 'independent contractor' agreement under which they could provide anesthesiology services. The letter set a deadline of January 25, 1995. All eight doctors rejected the contract offer Genesis offered Ps three extensions. D consented to the first two extensions. The first extended deadline to February 2, then February 10, and then February 15 at 6 p.m. On February 17, Ps approached Genesis to sign the independent contractor agreements they had previously rejected. Genesis sought the approval but D refused. Ps sued Genesis and D based in part that Ps were third-party beneficiaries. The district court granted Genesis summary judgment on all counts. The jury returned judgments in favor of Ps against D for $310,560 and $306,352. D moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which was denied. D appealed. Ps cross-appealed.