Case ID: f-appx_469/html/0761-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Derrick E. ANTELL, M.D., Alan B. Schorr, M.D., Frank G. Tonrey, M.D., Carmen Kavali, M.D., American Medical Association, Medical Society of the State of New York, Connecticut State Medical Society, Texas Medical Association, North Carolina Medical Society, Tennessee Medical Association, Medical Association of Georgia, California Medical Association, Florida Medical Association, Washington State Medical Society, Medical Society of New Jersey, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. AETNA INC., Aetna U.S. Healthcare, Aetna Health Inc., PA, Corp., Aetna Health Management, LLC, Aetna Life Insurance Company, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Stephen Henry, James Schwendig, Carmen Kavali, American Medical Association, California Medical Association, Medical Association of Georgia, Connecticut State Medical Society, North Carolina Medical Society, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Wellpoint, Inc., Defendant-Appellee.
    Nos. 11-11209, 11-11211
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    March 26, 2012.
    Robert J. Axelrod, D. Brian Hufford, Pomerantz, Haudek, Grossman & Gross, LLP, Joe R. Whatley, Jr., Edith M. Kallas, Whatley Drake & Kallas, LLC, New York, NY, W. Tucker Brown, Whatley, Drake & Kallas, LLC, Birmingham, AL, James E. Cecchi, Carella, Byrne, Cecchi, Olstein, Brody & Agnello, PC, Roseland, NJ, Andrew S. Friedman, Kathryn A. Jann, Elaine A. Ryan, Bonnett Faitbourn Friedman & Balint, Phoenix, AZ, William Charles Wright, Wright Law Offices, PA, West Palm Beach, FL, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
    Richard J. Doren, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Lacey Delynne Diggs, Greenberg Traurig LLP, Miami, FL, Tyler Richard Green, Geoffrey M. Sigler, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Appel-lees.
    Before TJOFLAT, PRYOR and FAY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Appellants are plaintiffs in lawsuits filed in California and New Jersey attacking the rates used to pay assigned claims for healthcare benefits. In response to these suits, appellees sought relief in the District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the court that had handled the settlement in In Re Managed Care Litig., MDL No. 1334. The district court in Florida found that the California and New Jersey suits violated its injunction and ordered that they be withdrawn. That order was appealed to us. On April 21, 2010, we dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Ex. A attached. We stated that the order was not final because there had been no imposition of sanctions for violating the order. Id.

Rather than completing the procedure for testing injunctions (a finding of contempt with the imposition of sanctions), appellants filed these declaratory judgment actions seeking a declaration that their suits in California and New Jersey were not covered by the injunction entered in MDL 1334. The district court dismissed the suits and stated that it had already determined that the suits in question were covered by the earlier injunction. Now, the California and New Jersey plaintiffs appeal that dismissal.

We review such dismissal for abuse of discretion. Wilton v. Seven Falls Co., 515 U.S. 277, 289-90, 115 S.Ct. 2137, 132 L.Ed.2d 214 (1995); Ameritas Variable Life Ins. Co. v. Roach, 411 F.3d 1328, 1330 (11th Cir.2005); Manuel v. Convergys Corp., 430 F.3d 1132, 1134-35 (11th Cir.2005). Clearly, there is none. A declaratory judgment action is no substitute for following the established procedure for testing injunctions, to wit: contempt and sanctions.

AFFIRMED.