In plaintiffs' case against a hospital and doctors under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) 42 U.S.C. section 1395dd, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed where: 1) the type of plaintiff's routine hospital visits for pregnancy and her status as a outpatient does not trigger EMTALA; and 2) plaintiffs' evidence was not sufficient to raise a disputed issue with respect to a stabilization claim.
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Civil Action No. 06-cv-03003)
District Judge: Honorable Juan R. Sanchez
Argued January 28, 2009
Opinion Filed September 2, 2009