arbitrary and capricious standard in Indiana

2010Carlberg, 694 N.E.2d at 230-31 .

2010Carlberg, 694 N.E.2d at 230-31 .

1991Pepple v. Parkview Memorial Hosp., Inc. (1989), Ind., 536 N.E.2d 274 .

1991Pepple v. Parkview Memorial Hosp., Inc. (1989) Ind., 536 N.E.2d 274, 276 .

1998Id.

1998Id.

1998Because the majority would apply essentially the same arbitrary and capricious standard to the IHSAA that it applies to administrative agencies, slip op. at 19 ( quoting Dep’t of Natural Resources v. Indiana Coal Council, Inc. , 542 N.E.2d 1000, 1007 (Ind. 1989), cert. denied , 493 U.S. 1078 , 110 S.Ct. 1130 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1036 (1990)), and because the IHSAA is a quasi-state actor, prudence and reason favor application of the same standard regardless of whether we are reviewing challenges from students or schools.

1997Because the majority would apply essentially the same arbitrary and capricious standard to the IHSAA that it applies to administrative agencies, op. at 233 (quoting Dep’t of Natural Resources v. Indiana Coal Council, Inc., 542 N.E.2d 1000, 1007 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1078 , 110 S.Ct. 1130 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1036 (1990)), and because the IHSAA is a quasi-state actor, prudence and reason favor application of the same standard regardless of whether we are reviewing challenges from students or schools.

1998Because the majority would apply essentially the same arbitrary and capricious standard to the IHSAA that it applies to administrative agencies, slip op. at 19 ( quoting Dep’t of Natural Resources v. Indiana Coal Council, Inc. , 542 N.E.2d 1000, 1007 (Ind. 1989), cert. denied , 493 U.S. 1078 , 110 S.Ct. 1130 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1036 (1990)), and because the IHSAA is a quasi-state actor, prudence and reason favor application of the same standard regardless of whether we are reviewing challenges from students or schools.

1997Because the majority would apply essentially the same arbitrary and capricious standard to the IHSAA that it applies to administrative agencies, op. at 233 (quoting Dep’t of Natural Resources v. Indiana Coal Council, Inc., 542 N.E.2d 1000, 1007 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1078 , 110 S.Ct. 1130 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1036 (1990)), and because the IHSAA is a quasi-state actor, prudence and reason favor application of the same standard regardless of whether we are reviewing challenges from students or schools.

1998Because the majority would apply essentially the same arbitrary and capricious standard to the IHSAA that it applies to administrative agencies, slip op. at 19 ( quoting Dep’t of Natural Resources v. Indiana Coal Council, Inc. , 542 N.E.2d 1000, 1007 (Ind. 1989), cert. denied , 493 U.S. 1078 , 110 S.Ct. 1130 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1036 (1990)), and because the IHSAA is a quasi-state actor, prudence and reason favor application of the same standard regardless of whether we are reviewing challenges from students or schools.

1997Because the majority would apply essentially the same arbitrary and capricious standard to the IHSAA that it applies to administrative agencies, op. at 233 (quoting Dep’t of Natural Resources v. Indiana Coal Council, Inc., 542 N.E.2d 1000, 1007 (Ind.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1078 , 110 S.Ct. 1130 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1036 (1990)), and because the IHSAA is a quasi-state actor, prudence and reason favor application of the same standard regardless of whether we are reviewing challenges from students or schools.

1996See Avant, supra ; Kriss v. Brown (1979), 180 Ind.App. 594 , 390 N.E.2d 193 .

1996See Avant, supra ; Kriss v. Brown (1979), 180 Ind.App. 594 , 390 N.E.2d 193 .

1989Joseph Memorial Hospital (1985), Ind.App., 482 N.E.2d 268, 271 , is disapproved to the extent that it permits courts to review a private hospital’s decision under an arbitrary and capricious standard.

1987Joseph Memorial Hosp. (1985), Ind.App., 482 N.E.2d 268 , an arbitrary and capricious standard of review was freely applied.

2016Instead of' analyzing the record to determine whether substantial evidence supported the Review Committee’s decision, see Watson, 938 N.E.2d at 680 , the trial court concluded the ‘plaintiffs “set forth substantial evidence” to support their position, tr. at 310.

1989While this Court has reviewed a public hospital’s decision to deny privileges in the face of a doctor’s claim that excluding him was “arbitrary, discriminatory, [and] unreasonable,” Hamilton County Hospital v. Andrews (1949), 227 Ind. 217, 223 , 84 N.E.2d 469, 471 , cert. denied, 338 U.S. 831 , 70 S.Ct. 73 , 94 L.Ed. 506 , we have never reviewed a private hospital’s decision under such a standard.

1989While this Court has reviewed a public hospital’s decision to deny privileges in the face of a doctor’s claim that excluding him was “arbitrary, discriminatory, [and] unreasonable,” Hamilton County Hospital v. Andrews (1949), 227 Ind. 217, 223 , 84 N.E.2d 469, 471 , cert. denied, 338 U.S. 831 , 70 S.Ct. 73 , 94 L.Ed. 506 , we have never reviewed a private hospital’s decision under such a standard.

1989While this Court has reviewed a public hospital’s decision to deny privileges in the face of a doctor’s claim that excluding him was “arbitrary, discriminatory, [and] unreasonable,” Hamilton County Hospital v. Andrews (1949), 227 Ind. 217, 223 , 84 N.E.2d 469, 471 , cert. denied, 338 U.S. 831 , 70 S.Ct. 73 , 94 L.Ed. 506 , we have never reviewed a private hospital’s decision under such a standard.

1989While this Court has reviewed a public hospital’s decision to deny privileges in the face of a doctor’s claim that excluding him was “arbitrary, discriminatory, [and] unreasonable,” Hamilton County Hospital v. Andrews (1949), 227 Ind. 217, 223 , 84 N.E.2d 469, 471 , cert. denied, 338 U.S. 831 , 70 S.Ct. 73 , 94 L.Ed. 506 , we have never reviewed a private hospital’s decision under such a standard.

1989While this Court has reviewed a public hospital’s decision to deny privileges in the face of a doctor’s claim that excluding him was “arbitrary, discriminatory, [and] unreasonable,” Hamilton County Hospital v. Andrews (1949), 227 Ind. 217, 223 , 84 N.E.2d 469, 471 , cert. denied, 338 U.S. 831 , 70 S.Ct. 73 , 94 L.Ed. 506 , we have never reviewed a private hospital’s decision under such a standard.

1988In Fernandez et al. v. Vazquez (1981), Fla.App., 397 So.2d 1171 , the Florida court of appeals discussed the continuing erosion of the arbitrary and capricious rule in the United States.

1988In doing just that, the supreme court of Alabama stated, "... in recent times, the necessity of reasonable alienation of commercial building space has become paramount in our everincreasing urban society." Homa-Goff Interiors, Inc. v. Cowden (1977), Ala., 350 So.2d 1035, 1039 , reh. denied.

1987On September 4, 1986 the trial court concluded inter alia, that Pepple received every due process right conferred by the medical staff by-laws; that Parkview is a private not-for-profit institution; that review of a private hospital's determination to exclude a physician is limited to an examination of the procedures required by the by-laws; that this Court's decision in Parkview, supra, forecloses review of the substantive issues even under an arbitrary and capricious standard because the records, proceedings, and communications within the peer review committee are privileged and confidential

1987On September 4,1986 the trial court concluded inter alia, that Pepple received every due process right conferred by the medical staff by-laws; that Parkview is a private not-for-profit institution; that review of a private hospital’s determination to exclude a physician is limited to an examination of the procedures required by the by-laws; that this Court’s decision in Parkview, supra, forecloses review of the substantive issues even under an arbitrary and capricious standard because the records, proceedings, and communications within the peer review committee are privileged and confidential;