AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• Dr. Sally Harris, a neurologist, and her patients (Plaintiffs) filed a lawsuit against ABQ Health Partners, LLC (ABQ HP) and its executives (Defendants) after Dr. Harris was terminated from ABQ HP twenty days before her planned resignation date. Dr. Harris had intended to continue treating her patients up until her resignation became effective and had scheduled appointments through July. Despite her resignation notice and a continuity plan for patient care, ABQ HP terminated her employment prematurely, leading to the lawsuit for injunctive relief to allow her to treat her patients during the interim.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiffs: Argued for a preliminary injunction to reinstate Dr. Harris at ABQ HP until her planned resignation date, asserting claims including breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duties, and unfair practices. They contended that the premature termination violated their rights and disrupted the continuity of medical care.
• Defendants: Contended that the issue of the preliminary injunction became moot once Dr. Harris opened her own practice and could resume patient care. They also argued that the district court's order denying the preliminary injunction was not final and thus not appealable.

Legal Issues

• Whether the appeal of the denial of injunctive relief was moot following Dr. Harris's establishment of her own practice.
• Whether the district court's order denying the preliminary injunction was a final order suitable for appeal.

Disposition

• The appeal was dismissed for mootness and lack of finality.

Reasons

• The Court, led by Judge Roderick T. Kennedy with Judges James J. Wechsler and Michael D. Bustamante concurring, concluded that the appeal was moot because the specific injunctive relief sought by Plaintiffs—to have Dr. Harris treat them until she could establish her own practice—was no longer actionable once Dr. Harris resumed her practice. The Court also determined that the district court's order was not final as it did not resolve all issues between the parties, leaving several claims and a motion for class certification unaddressed. The case was remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion, emphasizing that the merits of Plaintiffs' claims should be resolved at the lower court level.