STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA



STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF

ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

COUNTY OF GUILFORD 07 UNC 0447

Edward Kyle Robbins, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) DECISION

)

UNC Hospitals, )

)

Respondent. )

THIS MATTER comes before the undersigned Administrative Law Judge, Beecher R. Gray, on Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

Based upon the matters contained in the file and the lack of response from Petitioner, and after reviewing the record proper including Respondent’s Motion, the undersigned hereby makes the following ruling based on the standards of review for Motions for Summary Judgment.

Summary Judgment-Standard of Review

Summary judgment is designed to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved. Summary judgment should be used cautiously, with due regard to its purposes and a continuous observance of its requirements. See Brown v. Greene, 98 N.C. App. 377, 390 S.E.2d 695 (1990). The standard of review is whether there is a genuine issue of material fact and whether the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Kessing v. National Mortgage Corp., 278 N.C. 523, 534, 180 S.E.2d 823, 830 (1971). To entitle one to summary judgment, the movant must conclusively establish a legal bar to the nonmovant’s claim or complete defense to that claim. See Virginia Elec. And Power Co. v. Tillett, 80 N.C. App. 383, 385, 343 S.E.2d 188, 190-91, cert denied, 317 N.C. 715, 347 S.E.2d 457 (1986). The burden of establishing a lack of any legally triable issue resides with the movant. See Pembee Mfg. Corp. v. Cape Fear Constr. Co., 313 N.C. 488, 329 S.E.2d 350 (1985).

As observed in Nelson v. Ferris, 136 F. Supp. 2d 703, 712 (E.D. Mich. 2001), All three 1986 United States Supreme Court cases Matsushita Electrical Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 89 L. Ed. 2d 538, 106 S. Ct. 1348 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 91 L. Ed. 2d 202, 106 S. Ct. 2505 (1986); and Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 91 L. Ed. 2d 265, 106 S. Ct. 2548 (1986) ushered in a new era in the standards of review for a summary judgment motion. These cases, in the aggregate, lowered the movant’s burden on a summary judgment motion. Summary judgment is proper if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that [the moving] party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Rule 56, N.C.G.S. 1A-1.

BASED UPON the record, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, the undersigned makes the following undisputed findings based upon Respondent’s motion, affidavits, and Petitioner’s responses to discovery, including Rule 36 admissions.

1. Petitioner obtained necessary medical care at the University of North Carolina Hospitals from on or about August 8, 1999 through on or about August 18, 1999, accruing charges amounting to $19,079.77.

2. Respondent timely and properly filed a claim with Petitioner’s health insurer, Healthcare Savings, which denied payment on the claim.

3. After all payments and contractual adjustments were made, a balance of $11,690.00 remained on Petitioner’s account number 56332745.

4. Respondent mailed statements to Petitioner in which it advised him that it was his responsibility to pay the balance of $11,690.00 owed on account number 56332745.

5. Petitioner made a single payment in the amount of $10.00 on account no. 56332745 on March 11, 2000.

6. After receiving only one payment on the account, Respondent classified the account as bad debt and placed the account with the North Carolina Department of Revenue under the Set Off Debt Collection Act, N. C. G. S. 105A, et seq.

7. On March 17, 2003, Respondent notified Petitioner that the NC Department of Revenue had withheld $419.43 from Petitioner’s 2002 state income tax refund and had submitted it to Respondent to apply to Petitioner’s outstanding debt. Respondent advised Petitioner of his right to petition for a contested case but he did not file a petition or otherwise contest the validity of the debt.

8. On April 3, 2005, Respondent notified Petitioner that the NC Department of Revenue had withheld $1,379.00 from Petitioner’s 2004 state income tax refund and had submitted it to Respondent to apply to Petitioner’s outstanding debt. Respondent advised Petitioner of his right to petition for a contested case but he did not file a petition or otherwise contest the validity of the debt.

9. On March 19, 2006, Respondent notified Petitioner that the NC Department of Revenue had withheld $ 862.00 from Petitioner’s 2004 state income tax refund and had submitted it to Respondent to apply to Petitioner’s outstanding debt. Respondent advised Petitioner of his right to petition for a contested case but he did not file a petition or otherwise contest the validity of the debt.

10. On March 7, 2007, Respondent notified Petitioner that it had received monies from the NC Department of Revenue in the amount of $1,243.00 to be applied to his outstanding debt owed on account no. 56332745. Respondent advised Petitioner of his right to request a hearing.

11. Petitioner submitted a petition for a contested case hearing under G.S. 150B -23(a) which was filed and accepted by the Office of Administrative Hearings on March 22, 2007.

12. Respondent and Petitioner filed Prehearing Statements.

13. On May 17, 2007, Respondent submitted a brief set of Requests for Admissions upon Petitioner. Petitioner responded to Respondent’s Requests and admitted that he received the medical services rendered under account no. 56332745 and that a balance was owed on the account for medical services rendered to him by Respondent.

14. Petitioner admitted that he filed a petition in this matter solely because he and his family needed the money from his 2006 state income tax refund which was captured by the NC Department of Revenue to be applied to his debt owed to Respondent.

15. Respondent filed a Motion for Summary Judgment with this court that was served upon Petitioner on June 8, 2007.

16. Petitioner did not respond to Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

DECISION

IT NOW, THEREFORE, IS ORDERED that Respondent be granted summary judgment in this contested case regarding the set-off of Petitioner’s state income tax refund against accounts owed to Respondent and that Respondent is entitled to the state income tax refund otherwise due Petitioner in the amount of $1,243.00.

NOTICE

The agency making the final decision in this contested case is required to give each party an opportunity to file exceptions to this decision issued by the Undersigned, and to present written arguments to those in the agency who will make the final decision. N.C. Gen. Stat. 150B-36(a).

In accordance with N.C. Gen. Stat. 150B-36 the agency shall adopt each finding of fact contained in the Administrative Law Judge’s decision unless the finding clearly is contrary to the preponderance of the admissible evidence. For each finding of fact not adopted by the agency, the agency shall set forth separately and in detail the reasons for not adopting the finding of fact and the evidence in the record relied upon by the agency in not adopting the finding of fact. For each new finding of fact made by the agency that is not contained in the Administrative Law Judge’s decision, the agency shall set forth separately and in detail the evidence in the record relied upon by the agency in making the finding of fact.

The agency that will make the final decision in this contested case is the University of North Carolina Hospitals.

ORDER

IT HEREBY IS ORDERED that the agency review this decision in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 150B-36(d) and serve a copy of the Final Decision on the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714 in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 150B-36(b3).

This the 3rd day of July, 2007.

__________________________________

Beecher R. Gray

Administrative Law Judge

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download