Kaiser Papers is a Public Service Web Site
In Copyright Since September 11, 2000 This is a public service web site.
Permission is granted to mirror if credit to the source is given and the
material is not offered for sale. The Kaiser Papers is not by Kaiser but is ABOUT Kaiser
About Us
Contact-- MCRC --PrivacyPolicy


Some Class Action Lawsuits Against Kaiser and The Permanente

A Class Action suit involves less rigorous examinations of individual cases and puts more emphasis on a pattern of conduct. A Class Action suit can provide out-of-court settlements or, court verdicts with as little pain as possible." - Richard Winton, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

December 6, 2014 - Kaiser Permanente To Pay $5.4M To End TCPA Class Action

By Caroline Simson
Law360, New York (December 05, 2014, 12:38 PM ET) -- Kaiser Permanente will pay $5.35 million to settle a class action accusing the health care organization of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by sending unsolicited prerecorded messages to former customers’ cellphones, according to an order signed by a California federal judge Thursday.

In his preliminary approval order, U.S. District Judge John A. Houston also certified a nationwide class of Kaiser’s former customers, who had canceled their health insurance coverage and subsequently received unwanted calls to their cellphones.......

March 31, 2014 -

Kaiser illegally fails to treat serious mental illness on par with treatment for physical illness, a class claims in a lawsuit filed last week.

     Charles Dion sued Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, on behalf of himself and other plan members with serious mental illnesses, in Alameda County Superior Court. ......

The class claims Kaiser participates in unfair business practices, and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief.

     The class is represented by Robert S. Gianelli and Jully C. Pae of Gianelli and Morris, a Law Corporation, in Los Angeles, and Scott C. Glovesky in Pasadena.

Two Oregon patients sue Kaiser Permanente, claim they were HIV tested without permission
By Aimee Green, The Oregonian The Oregonian
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on November 29, 2013 at 4:29 PM, updated November 29, 2013 at 5:19 PM

Two Portland area residents are suing Kaiser Permanente for screening them for HIV -- along with about 6,500 other Northwest members -- without seeking their permission.

The plaintiffs -- identified in a federal lawsuit as Barbara Kelley of Multnomah County and William Pearse of Clackamas County -- are asking a judge to approve the suit as a class action suit that could seek $6.5 million or more from Kaiser for the apparent misstep.

Oregon law requires Kaiser to inform patients that they are about to be tested for the virus that causes AIDS and give patients the option of declining the testing. But from April 11 to May 5, Kaiser tested Oregon and Washington members who were ages 50 to 65, but it “did not communicate this new protocol” to them, according to the suit.

The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Oregon on Wednesday. It claims invasion of privacy, unlawful trade practices and fraud. The suit asks for $1,000 in damages each for Kelley and Pearse, plus millions more if others who were tested are allowed to join the litigation.

Kaiser performed the tests as the first phase in a plan to test all members, ages 15 to 65, for the virus.

Nov 1, 2013 - From News Article:
A Clark County woman has filed a lawsuit against Kaiser Permanente for testing patients’ blood for human immunodeficiency virus without their knowledge or consent. She’s seeking to have the suit made into a class action.

Lawfirm of Stritmatter Kessler Whelan Coluccio
The claims are brought strictly under state law, rather than federal law.

October 2, 2013 - Filed in Alameda County, California - alleging denial of timely and/or appropiate care.    
Filed by Siegel, Lewitter, Malkani of Oakland, California
Contact Information: Latika Malkani
Phone Number:   510-452-5000
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 307
Oakland, California 94612

California Class Action Case RG13697775
Filing found here for your viewing:  

This suit consists of all current and former Kaiser members who have either been denied access to mental health services, dissuaded from pursuing
mental health services, provided with delayed access to mental health services and/or provided with inaccurate and confusing information
from Kaiser regarding mental health services available to them from October 2, 2009 to the present.

(Violations of Business and Professions Code, Section 17200 et seq., Violations of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, Breach of the Covenant of
Good Faith and Fair Dealing, Breach of Contract)

May 29, 2013
The San Francisco Employment Lawyers at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik File Suit Against Kaiser Permanente For Allegedly Denying Their Account Managers Overtime Pay

Account Managers filed a class action with the help of the San Francisco labor attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik against Kaiser Permanente for alleged misclassification as salaried employees exempt from overtime

May 3, 2013
Nurses Hit Kaiser Permanente, AMN With Wage-And-Hour Suit
By Dan Prochilo

 Kaiser Permanente International and several units of AMN Healthcare Services Inc. made nurses work through their meal breaks, put in unpaid overtime and keep their schedules perpetually open in case they were called in to work, according to a wage-and-hour class action filed against the health care corporations Wednesday.

April 2013 --  Kaiser Permanente Automated Call Class Action Lawsuit
By Jessica Tyner

In late April 2013, Kaiser was hit with a TCPA class action lawsuit for contacting consumers using an automated messaging system

According to the latest lawsuit, Kaiser called a California resident who never consented to receive phone calls. Plaintiff Rafael David Sherman says that Kaiser called him using an automatic message 90 days after cancelling his insurance with the company. The call was an advertisement for Kaiser’s services, which is considered a marketing call -- and violates TCPA law.

.....Most people have received automated messages from businesses. The reason Sherman’s lawsuit is valid is because cancelling services automatically revokes any right the business has to market or attempt to sell their services. If a person is an active member or client of an organization, that may imply that the business has a right to reach out with marketing efforts. However, if a person has cancelled their membership or never joined, that violates TCPA rules. --Read More at:

Find out more about your rights at the Text Message Spam, Cell Phone Call TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation.

Kaiser Sued for Failing to Pay Case Managers for Overtime
Court Filing:

Article located at:
mirrored for historical purposes at:

Update on Kaiser Class over Co-Payments - A federal judge dismissed with prejudice a class action that claimed Kaiser cheats policyholders by refusing to reimburse them for copayments. See: http://legalstuff.kaiserpapers.org/glaus.html

The lawfirm of has filed the following suit.  The law firm may be contacted at:

Kaiser Class Action Filed in California
Alleges failure to refund copayments after collecting reimbursement
By Jon Hood

May 31, 2009
A California resident has filed suit against insurance provider Kaiser Permanente, alleging that the corporation failed to refund her copayment after collecting under a personal injury award. Although the plaintiff's individual damages are negligible, the issue could affect hundreds or even thousands of Kaiser customers.

Nicole Glaus of Concord, CA incurred $517.20 in medical expenses after being rear-ended in a traffic accident. Glaus was subsequently awarded $4,250 in damages in a suit filed against the individual who rear-ended her. Kaiser's policy provides that, when a customer collects damages in a lawsuit, the insurance company can seek reimbursement of costs. Kaiser did this, but failed to credit Glaus for the $20 copayment that she initially forked over.

The suit is brought on behalf of all Kaiser members whose plans are part of a private employer group medical plan — as Glaus's was — and who reimbursed Kaiser after a successful lawsuit but never received their co-payment back afterwards.

Kaiser's own "Evidence of Coverage," or EOC, requires that Kaiser refund a consumer's copayment when collecting expenses after a lawsuit settlement. The suit says that Glaus and all other class members have an "equitable lien" against Kaiser, since the company wrongfully withheld money from them.

Glaus is being represented by the law firm of , based in Oakland, CA. Attorney Daniel Feinberg conceded that $20 is a small amount of money, but said enough customers have been affected that the aggregate amount of money at issue is likely substantial. "If you steal a million dollars from one person, you're gonna have a lawsuit," Feinberg told the San Francisco Weekly. "But if you steal it by small cuts, you can get away with it until someone files a class action to stop you."

The suit seeks reimbursement of unrefunded copayments and an injunction prohibiting Kaiser from continuing the practice in the future.

The action was brought under the Employee Retirement Income Reimbursement Act (ERISA), which protects individuals who might suffer discrimination from health insurance companies. The ERISA provisions at issue require Kaiser to act as a customer's fiduciary, and to administer the plan in the best interests of the consumer. The suit alleges that Kaiser breached that duty, stating that the "defendant has enriched itself at the expense of Ms. Glaus in violation of the fiduciary duty of loyalty."

This isn't the first time that co-payments have been at the center of a class-action lawsuit. In April, a settlement was reached in Massachusetts case where the manufacturer and a publisher of drug data colluded to inflate co-payments on name-brand drugs. Additionally, according to its website, the St. Louis law firm of Carey & Danis is investigation claims that several HMO's have charged excessive copayments over the last five to ten years.

Read more: "Kaiser Class Action Filed in California" -

September 2008
Antonio Gonzalez v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Kaiser Permanente and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc.

A proposed class-action lawsuit has been filed by Antonio Gonzalez ("Plaintiff") against Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Kaiser Permanente and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. (hereafter, referred to collectively, as "Kaiser"), on behalf of all non-exempt employees employed in the State of California by defendants (Kaiser) in Defendants' hospice/home health palliative care departments, at any time since September 28, 2008, and since that time, i.e., beginning on the four years preceding the filing of the lawsuit on September 28, 2008. The case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case No. BC 492725

Court filing:  

Kaiser is one of the hospitals named in the suit against Trasylol.

The following is from the law firm of Anapol Schwartz

Aprotinin/Trasylol doubles the risk of kidney failure and stroke and increases the risk of heart failure or heart attack by 55 percent. Aprotinin/Trasylol is an injection used to prevent excessive blood loss during heart bypass surgery. Aprotinin is linked to encephalopathy, degenerative brain diseases. Are you or a family member eligible for an aprotinin lawsuit?

Please note Aprotinin is the generic word for the brand name Trasylol.

Why do hospitals use it? Maybe because Bayer funds hospital programs and research grants.

The generic alternatives Amicar (aminocaproic acid) and Cyklokapron (tranexamic acid) were studied too. These generic drugs were confirmed to be both safe and effective. Researchers estimated that if hospitals stopped using Trasylol and instead used the above generic drugs, it would save 9,000 to 11,000 people every year from kidney dialysis.

The difference in bypass surgery drugs is alarming:
Trasylol costs $1,300 per dose (manufactured by Bayer AG)
Amicar costs only $11 per dose (generic)
Cyklokapron costs $44 per dose (generic)



If you or someone close to you has received Trasylol (aprotinin injection) during heart surgery, and then suffered from kidney problems (kidney failure), heart attacks, stroke, or other serious medical conditions, you are urged to contact the law offices of Alexander Hawes, LLP at 800.921.1776 to speak to an attorney. The call is free, and there is no obligation. You may also email us below. Act now, as delays can harm your case.


June 05, 2006 08:11 PM US Eastern Timezone

Eisenberg & Gray Law Firm Files Class Action Suit Against Kaiser Kidney Transplant Program
SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 5, 2006--A class action complaint was filed today in San Francisco Superior Court against Kaiser, who closed their kidney transplant program in San Francisco last month. The lawsuit was filed by Irvine attorneys Eisenberg & Gray LLP, who are also lead counsel in the transplant litigation against the UCI Medical Center.

"It appears that Kaiser was more concerned about the bottom line than the health of their member patients. They forced their Northern California kidney transplant patients to leave the University of California at San Francisco and University of California at Davis and become patients at Kaiser's in-house transplant facility in San Francisco. Kaiser did not want to pay for ongoing kidney transplant medical care for approximately 2,000 Northern California patients, so they attempted to open their own facility but totally failed in the process," said Irvine attorney Larry Eisenberg. "This is an outrageous example of gross mismanagement at the highest level. Kaiser interrupted ongoing transplant medical care and rejected donor kidneys, which caused patient deaths and severely compromised the health of their members," said Eisenberg.

The lawsuit alleges negligence, fraud and misrepresentation due to Kaiser's inability to properly administrate the San Francisco Kidney Transplant Program. "It is clear that Kaiser patients did not receive proper medical care and kidney transplants were delayed. There was a complete lack of oversight in the operation and administration of the Kaiser program and the patients and their families paid the price," said Eisenberg.

Eisenberg & Gray LLP, Irvine
Larry Eisenberg, 949-753-1500

The California Consumer health Care Council (CCHCC ) would like to speak to anyone who made a claim to or against Kaiser, as a result of which sensitive medical information was improperly disclosed to anyone who had
no right to see it  See: http://legalstuff.kaiserpapers.org/cchcc.html
ATTENTION - Kaiser Foundation and The Permanente Medical Group has just now publicly admitted that they knew over 100 Kaiser members personal health information, including personal residence and telephone information and patient ID information was posted on a publicly accessible web site and such web site was able to be publicly accessed since 2002.  If you believe that you are the victim of Kaiser's negligence and lack of security of your personal information please either contact Vickie at: Vickie@kaiserpapers.org or the California Consumer Health Care Council at: http://www.cchcc.org/ - 1-888-CAL-COUNCIL  email: Mr. John Metz - cchcc@igc.org

On January 26, 2005, Seeger • Salvas LLP - http://legalstuff.kaiserpapers.org/pdfs/Kaiser Lawsuit.pdf  filed a class action lawsuit against Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. to stop Kaiser from revoking its members’ health insurance based on the member’s response to a hopelessly ambiguous application question. Question No. 9 on Kaiser’s standard application asks “Do you have any unexplained and/or undiagnosed symptoms such as:” and then lists 14 specific“symptoms” such as chest pain, shortness of breath, and loss of consciousness, followed by boxes for “Other,” and “None of the above.” Kaiser members who do not suffer from any of the specifically listed “symptoms” and check “None of the above” may not realize that Kaiser has used Question No. 9 to retroactively revoke health care coverage. After a member is diagnosed with a significant medical condition, Kaiser’s insurance people have poured through the member’s medical history – using 20/20 hindsight – trying to find something that might have been a “symptom” of that disorder. Once such a “preexisting symptom” is found, Kaiser revokes the member’s health care insurance, claiming that the member intentionally misrepresented his or her health status by not checking “Other” on Question No. 9.

Ex-worker sues Kaiser over X-ray standards 

A former Kaiser Permanente employee filed a whistle-blower lawsuit this week against the health care network, claiming he was fired for complaining to regulators about Kaiser's X-ray standards. 

Kaiser sued in instrument scare

A class-action lawsuit was filed Monday in Sacramento Superior Court on behalf of more than 1,000 Kaiser Permanente patients who may have been exposed to contaminated instruments.

Nonprofit health council sues Kaiser over medical disclosures
The California Consumer Health Care Council has sued the Kaiser Foundation over what it says is inappropriate disclosure of private medical records. 

The council contends that when Kaiser learns of a suit or potential suit by a patient, its legal department opens and studies that patient's private medical records without notifying the patient. This alleged review by Kaiser's legal department is inappropriate, said the council, because Kaiser's legal employees have no role in the patient's health care. 

"If a patient has a claim against Kaiser for negligently cutting off a little finger, why should a clerk in Kaiser's legal department be able to review the patient's entire medical file, which might include information on unrelated sexual, psychiatric or personal problems ...?" asked Martin Blake, one of the lawyers who filed the suit in Alameda County Superior Court for the council on Monday. 

John Metz, the chairman of the council, said that Kaiser has put its own legal interests above the protection of its patients' privacy. "It is just wrong," he said in a statement


Area physicians sue Kaiser Class-action case stems from HMO's decision to leave Kansas City area
cross referenced with: http://drphillips.kaiserpapers.org/kansaswaxman.html
and  http://businesspractices.kaiserpapers.org/kpmedicalserviceagreement.html
and  http://businesspractices.kaiserpapers.org/articlek.html
and  http://ekaiserinsurance.kaiserpapers.org/
and  http://businesspractices.kaiserpapers.org/50.html
and  http://businesspractices.kaiserpapers.org/unauthorized-outline.html
and  http://businesspractices.kaiserpapers.org/scarlinakp.html
and  http://news.kaiserpapers.org/kickedoutnews.html


http://legalstuff.kaiserpapers.org/drinsur.html And for the Actual Text of the Suit http://www.tlpj.org/briefs/timmis_kaiser.htm

Kaiser Health Foundation , Inc., et al.
This case is brought pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") to enforce the obligations imposed by that statute upon organizations doing business as Kaiser Permanente to disclose and to accurately represent all material facts relating to the insurance benefits (coverage) provided by Kaiser to Plaintiff and the Class.

Kaiser Bait and Switch Scam - Class Action Lawsuit Information
Patients who belong to Kaiser Permanente health-maintenance organizations aren't being told the truth about how their doctors make decisions about their health care, according to a class-action lawsuit filed yesterday in U.S. District Court in Seattle. 

Kaiser and the Disabled - contents now removed from original link 

originally located at:http://www.resna.org/taproject/policy/initiatives/privins.html

Kaiser-Permanente HMO Settles Landmark Agreement
Settlement Agreement
The nation's largest nonprofit H.M.O. agreed in April 2001 to revamp all its California health centers and policies to ensure that people with disabilities have access to the full range of health care. The agreement, filed in 2000 against the HMO, will settle a class-action lawsuit, the first of its kind in the nation, on behalf of all its California members with disabilities. The lawsuit argued that Kaiser discriminated against patients with disabilities by giving them inferior medical care. Part of the problem, the lawsuit said, is inaccessible medical equipment, like examination tables that do not lower and scales and mammography machines that cannot be used by people in wheelchairs.


Victa v. Kaiser and Olsen v. Kaiser are pending in the San Francisco Superior Court.


Kaiser Faces Lawsuit Over Ad Campaign
A consumer group backed by Ralph Nader is filing a novel lawsuit today that alleges Kaiser Permanente made false advertising claims about its quality of care to recruit new members. 


Cancer patients say HMOs refused proton beam treatment
for historical purposes mirrored at:

Kaiser Members Sue HMO Over Ads.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP, Mar. 17, 1999) - Members of one of the nation's largest HMOs have sued the organization, claiming they were duped by ads that said its doctors weren't influenced by financial concerns. The lawsuit contends Kaiser Permanente and its parent, The Permanente Federation, compromised care with their policies. "Kaiser has gone beyond the pale with its statements here that doctors make decisions based on medical need and there's no fiscal interference," said Jamie Court of the nonprofit Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, which filed the proposed class-action lawsuit in Superior Court on Tuesday. The lawsuit contends that Kaiser withheld up to 30% of doctors' salaries and tied physician bonus pay and other compensation to reaching certain profit goals. Kaiser called the allegations "patently false."

Outcome of the suit Over False Advertising
Kaiser settles two lawsuits
Accused of holding back on care, the HMO will post its treatment guidelines.
By Lisa Rapaport -- Bee Staff Writer - (Published January 24, 2003)
Kaiser Permanente agreed to make public the treatment guidelines its physicians follow and to disclose how they get paid as part of a settlement of two lawsuits that accused the HMO of misrepresenting how decisions about patient care were made.