Holling-Fry v. Coventry Health Care of Kansas, Inc.

Filing 161

ORDER granting 118 Plaintiff's motion in limine. Signed on 9/27/11 by District Judge Greg Kays. (Francis, Alexandra)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
WESTERN DIVISION
JOY HOLLING-FRY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
COVENTRY HEALTH CARE OF
KANSAS, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 07-0092-CV-W-DGK

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion in limine (doc. 118) to exclude evidence
regarding an alleged interpretation of 20 CSR 400-7.100 (“the copay regulation”) by the Missouri
Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions and Professional Registrations (“DIFP”). Plaintiff
argues evidence of any interpretation of the copay regulation by DIFP is irrelevant because
Defendant agreed to be bound by the Vermiglio court’s interpretation of the regulation and because
any interpretation of the regulation has not been subject to notice and comment. Defendant argues
the Court should hear the evidence because this is a judge tried case, and the Court can decide what,
if any, weight to give it. Defendant also contends the evidence is relevant to the issues of agency
deference and Plaintiffs’ request for equitable relief.
Because Defendant agreed to be bound by the Vermiglio court’s ruling on this issue, which
was that the 50% copayment cap applies under the Missouri regulation to Defendant’s prescription
drug rider, and that this cap applies at the point of service, the Court holds Defendant should be
bound by this ruling.
Plaintiffs’ motion in limine is GRANTED. Evidence of any alternate interpretation of the
copay regulation by DIFP shall be excluded.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: September 27, 2011

/s/ Greg Kays
GREG KAYS, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2