Baptist Health Systems, Mercy Health System, and Washington Regional Medical Center, Appellants — Danielson, J…

Summary

Justice Danielson dissented from the majority’s conclusion that the hospitals’ challenge to the Arkansas Peer Review Fairness Act was not a proper declaratory-judgment action. He would find a present justiciable controversy because the Act imposed ongoing compliance duties and potential liability on the hospitals, and would further find the parties’ legal interests adverse and the issues ripe. Justice Wood, dissenting separately, likewise would reach the merits because the hospitals needed to know their obligations before being sued.