⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

Trent Vanderzee challenges medical charges after his daughter received a replacement cochlear implant at the University of Chicago Medical Center. He alleges that the hospital overbilled both him and his health insurer. His lawsuit accuses the hospital of fraudulent billing. The hospital seeks to send the case to binding arbitration, a private decision process outside court, under its facility contract with the insurer. Vanderzee did not sign that contract. The district judge refused to compel arbitration, and the hospital appealed. Today's argument concerns who must arbitrate, not whether the medical bill itself was fraudulent. One hospital theory is third-party-beneficiary status: a person can have rights under a contract intended for their direct benefit, even without being a party. Daniel Campbell will represent the hospital and argue that the contract's patient-billing protections give Vanderzee direct benefits that also bind him to arbitration.

Trent Vanderzee v. University of Chicago Medical Center (No. 25-2962) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued September 29, 2026.