Rocky Mountain High Prices Spur Patient Plaintiff Lawsuit

A woman who thought she was paying four figures for elective spinal fusion surgery filed suit when her provider demanded six figures.

A recent legal decision from the Colorado Supreme Court demonstrates that if patient financial responsibility forms are not clear and understandable to the patient, then it may cost you.

The case is French v. Centura Health Corporation, et al.; after many years of litigation and appeals, the Colorado Supreme Court rejected a hospital’s right to balance-bill an out‑of‑network patient for elective surgery charges. In particular, the Court held that the patient never consented to pay the facility’s billed charges, and that the hospital’s standard template agreement, which required the patient to be responsible for all charges not covered by insurance, was insufficient to incorporate by reference to the hospital’s chargemaster. 

Instead, the Court found that the patient and the hospital did not agree to the price of services, and that it was up to the jury to determine what a reasonable price should have been, under the circumstances.

The dispute between the patient, Lisa Melody French, and Centura Health Corporation, arose from a spinal fusion surgery. Before performing the procedure, Centura reviewed the patient’s insurance and informed her that she would be responsible for an in‑network out‑of‑pocket cost‑sharing payment of $1,337. After services were rendered, Centura realized that it had misread Ms. French’s insurance card and that she was actually out‑of‑network. The hospital then billed her the difference of the billed charges for the services and the payment for out-of-network benefits, which amounted to a whopping $229,112.

Ms. French refused to pay. Centura then sued her for breach of contract, based upon her agreement to pay for any charges for her care not covered by insurance. In that regard, Ms. French had signed hospital service agreements (HSAs) stating, in relevant part, that she agreed to pay “all charges of the hospital,” which Centura argued included the chargemaster rates.  

The Colorado Supreme Court disagreed with Centura. Noting that neither the HSAs or the Patient Bill of Rights forms mentioned the chargemaster or included an expressed price term, the Court concluded that the chargemaster was not incorporated by reference into the patient’s agreement to pay for services.  

The Court held that for incorporation by reference to be effective, “it must be clear that the parties to the agreement had knowledge of and assented to the incorporated terms.” Because it was unclear whether Ms. French “had knowledge of (or) assented to” paying Centura’s chargemaster rates, it could not be incorporated into the health services agreement by reference.

As the chargemaster rates did not apply, the Colorado Supreme Court concluded that there was no price term agreed to between the patient and the hospital. Accordingly, the Court held that Ms. French was only required to pay $767 to the hospital, which is the amount that the jury had determined to be a reasonable value of the services provided in its 2018 verdict.  

It is important to note that many of Centura’s arguments attempted to shift the burden to the patient. In that regard, Centura asserted that the patient failed to avail “herself of the resources afforded by the Colorado statutes addressing transparency of hospital pricing.” However, the Court was not persuaded, and held that the statutes did not place a burden on patients, but instead placed the burden on hospitals to disclose facility charges to patients. Centura also argued that it had no responsibility to “understand the patient’s insurance better than the patient does,” but the Court didn’t agree. 

What is the takeaway? That for hospitals and providers, ignorance is not bliss.  

While an extreme example of a balance billing nightmare, this case underscores the importance of the federal No Surprises Act, which became effective on Jan. 1, 2022, and prohibits surprise out-of-network bills for emergency and some non-emergency medical services.  

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Brianna Santolli

Brianna Santolli is currently an attorney at Kelley Drye & Warren LLP. She specializes in litigation and health law and is known for her public speaking.

Related Stories

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

Ask Dr. Hirsch: Clarifying Medicare’s Most Misunderstood Rules – Part 2

Medicare regulations are complex and even seasoned professionals struggle to apply them consistently. Due to overwhelming demand, Dr. Hirsch returns for Part 2 of Ask Dr. Hirsch: Clarifying Medicare’s Most Misunderstood Rules to answer even more of Medicare’s most misunderstood questions, covering inpatient status, observation, SNF access, Medicare Advantage denials, and more. Join Dr. Hirsch as he provides clear, referenced answers to real-world questions submitted by your peers, helping you navigate Medicare compliance with confidence and clarity.

June 18, 2026

Reengineering Utilization Management: Building an Adaptive Model for the New Payer Era

Traditional utilization management models can no longer keep pace with regulatory shifts, payer scrutiny, and operational pressures. In this webcast, Tiffany Ferguson, LMSW, CMAC, ACM, ACPA-C, introduces an Adaptive Model strategy that modernizes UM through role specialization, technology-driven workflows, and proactive, team-based processes. Attendees will learn how to restructure programs to improve efficiency, strengthen clinical collaboration, and enhance financial performance in a rapidly changing healthcare environment.

May 20, 2026

Compliance for the Inpatient Psychiatric Facility (IPF-PPS): Minimizing Federal Audit Findings by Strengthening Best Practices

Federal auditors are intensifying their focus on inpatient psychiatric facilities, using advanced data analytics to spotlight outliers and pursue high‑dollar repayments. In this high‑impact webcast, Michael Calahan, PA, MBA, Compliance Officer and V.P., Hospital & Physician Compliance, breaks down what regulators are really targeting in IPF-PPS admissions, documentation, treatment and discharge planning. Attendees will learn practical steps to tighten processes, avoid common audit triggers and protect reimbursement and reduce the risk of multimillion-dollar repayment demands.

April 9, 2026

Mastering MDM for Accurate Professional Fee Coding

In this timely session, Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS-P, CPEDC, COPC, breaks down the complexities of Medical Decision Making (MDM) documentation so providers can confidently capture the true complexity of their care. Attendees will learn practical, efficient strategies to ensure documentation aligns with current E/M guidelines, supports accurate coding, and reduces audit risk, all without adding to charting time.

March 31, 2026

Trending News

Prepare for the 2025 CMS IPPS Final Rule with ICD10monitor’s IPPSPalooza! Click HERE to learn more

Get 15% OFF on all educational webcasts at ICD10monitor with code JULYFOURTH24 until July 4, 2024—start learning today!

This Memorial Day, we honor those who gave all for our freedom. Take 20% off sitewide through May 29 with code MEMORIAL26 at checkout

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24