MEDICARE SET ASIDES/CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS PITFALLS AND PRACTICE POINTERS

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "MEDICARE SET ASIDES/CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS PITFALLS AND PRACTICE POINTERS"

Transcription

1 MEDICARE SET ASIDES/CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS PITFALLS AND PRACTICE POINTERS Presented and Prepared by: Bradford J. Peterson Urbana, Illinois Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen PEORIA SPRINGFIELD URBANA ROCKFORD EDWARDSVILLE CHICAGO 2014 Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen H-1

2 MEDICARE SET-ASIDES/CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS PITFALLS AND PRACTICE POINTERS I. INTRODUCTION... H-5 A. Option One... H-7 B. Option Two... H-7 C. Option Three... H-8 D. Option Four... H-8 E. Option Five... H-8 F. Option Six... H-9 G. Option Seven... H-9 II. III. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS BETWEEN CMS LIABILITY REGULATIONS AND STATE TORT LAW PRINCIPLES:... H-10 MEDICARE SET-ASIDE ARRANGEMENTS, FUNDING AND ADMINISTRATION... H-10 IV. CASE LAW UPDATE... H-12 A. Court Enforces Settlement Where Conditional Payments Exceed Total Settlement Amount... H-12 B. Court Refuses to Issue Advisory Opinion as to Whether a Liability MSA is Necessary... H-12 C. Where Claimant Died Prior to MSA Funding Court Orders Defendant to Pay MSA Seed Money, but Defendant is not Required to Fund Annuity Portion of the MSA... H-12 D. Medicare s Refusal to Compromise Conditional Payments Runs Contrary to the Public Policy in Favor of Settlements... H-13 E. Conditional Payments Claim by CMS Attaches to Settlement of Wrongful Death Claim Where Medical Expenses are an Element of Damages... H-14 F. Where Medical Expense is Not an Element of Damage in Wrongful Death Action Conditional Payments Lien Does Not Attach... H-15 G. Sixth Circuit Fails to Apply Comparative Fault Principles to CMS Conditional Payments Claim... H-15 H. Attorney s Fees Allowed on Portion of Settlement Allocated for Liability Medicare Set-Aside Account... H-16 H-2

3 I. Court Approves Liability Medicare Set-Aside as Reasonably Protecting Medicare s Interests... H-17 J. Court Approves Medical Benefits Class Action Settlement Recognizing Obligation to Satisfy Conditional Payments and Protect Medicare as to Future Medical Expense... H-17 K. Court Requires Plaintiff s Disclosure of Information Necessary for SCHIP Reporting... H-17 L. Court Refuses Attempt to Discount Conditional Payments Claim Based on Compromise Nature of Settlement... H-18 M. Insurer Did Not Act in Bad Faith by Placing Medicare on Settlement Draft... H-18 N. Court Rejects Defendant s Attempt to Require a Medicare Set-Aside as an Element of Settlement.... H-18 V. MMSEA SECTION 111 REPORTING... H-19 VI. THE SMART ACT MEDICARE REFORMS BECOME LAW... H-20 A. Determination of Conditional Payment Amount (Effective 9 Months After Enactment)... H-20 B. Reconsideration of Conditional Payment Amount... H-20 C. Appeal (Effective Upon Enactment)... H-21 D. Threshold Excluding Conditional Payment Reimbursement (Effective January 1, 2014)... H-21 E. SCHIP Reporting Fines and Penalties (Effective Upon Enactment)... H-21 F. Three Year Statute of Limitations (Effective 6 Months After Enactment)... H-21 G. Social Security and HIC Numbers (Effective 18 Months After Enactment)... H-21 H. CMS Issues SMART Act Interim Final Rule (Issued September 19, 2013)... H-22 H-3

4 VII. PROTECTING MEDICARE PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN SETTLEMENT... H-23 A. Identification Of Medicare Beneficiaries... H-23 B. Identification of Conditional Payment Amount Before Settlement Negotiations... H-23 C. Use of Indemnification and Hold Harmless Agreements... H-23 D. Identify Medicare Set-Aside Issues for Future Medical Expense Early in Settlement Negotiations... H-24 E. Settlement Terms Should Include the Specifics of MSA Funding... H-24 The cases and materials presented here are in summary and outline form. To be certain of their applicability and use for specific claims, we recommend the entire opinions and statutes be read and counsel consulted. H-4

5 MEDICARE SET-ASIDES/CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS PITFALLS AND PRACTICE POINTERS I. INTRODUCTION Medicare Set-Asides are on the Horizon in Personal Injury Litigation Claimants, defendants and insurers all have an obligation to protect Medicare s interests under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, 42 U.S.C. 1395y(b)(2). Obligations exist to protect Medicare with regard to past medical bills that may have been paid by Medicare for the claimant s injury related treatment. These payments by Medicare are commonly referred to as "conditional payments." Liability insurance is deemed primary and Medicare is deemed secondary where a Medicare beneficiary has an existing or potential recovery under a liability policy. 42 C.F.R permits Medicare to make a conditional payment in satisfaction of the medical bills and such payment is "conditioned" of its right to reimbursement under the liability policy at the time satisfaction of a settlement, judgment or award. In addition to the conditional payment rights, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services maintains that liability insurers also have a duty to protect Medicare s interests with regard to future medical expenses. The Medicare Secondary Payer Act was intended to insure that Medicare was not making payments for medical expenses when other insurance was available. In 1980 Congress also passed the Omnibus Reconciliation Act which expanded Medicare s Secondary Payer status and right to reimbursement for conditional payments to include liability, auto liability and no fault insurance. Early efforts to apply the Medicare Secondary Payer Act to liability policies were rejected by the courts, Thompson v. Goetzmann, 337 F.3d 489 (5th Cir. 2003), In re Orthopedic Bone Screw Products Liability Litigation, 202 F.R.D. 154 (E.D. Pa. 2001), Fanning v. United States, 346 F.3d 386 (3d Cir. 2003). In many instances the courts found that liability insurers were not required to "pay promptly" as required under the Act and, therefore, liability insurers were not subject to making reimbursement to Medicare. The issue of whether liability settlements must also protect Medicare s interests with regard to future medical expense became a focus of attention when Congress enacted the Medicare and Medicaid SCHIP Extension Act of 2007, 42 U.S.C. 1395y(b)(7)&(8) (2008). The statute created mandatory reporting requirements for claims involving Medicare eligible individuals. Although implementation was delayed for several years, liability insurers are now required to report to CMS those liability settlements involving Medicare eligible individuals. The relevance of SCHIP to the Medicare Secondary Payer Act is that Medicare now has a mechanism in place in which to identify all liability settlements involving Medicare eligible individuals. Reporting requirements under SCHIP will specifically allow Medicare to not only identify the liability settlements and settlement amounts but also the nature of the injury for H-5

6 which compensation has been paid. With this information, Medicare will then be able to determine whether future medical expenses should be satisfied by Medicare or potentially deny future medical expense for the injury that was the subject matter of the liability settlement. The Medicare Secondary Payer Act does not specifically address future medical expenses in either a workers compensation or liability context. Any ambiguity with regard to parties obligations under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act is clarified, however, when one looks at various pronouncements by Medicare. Although they do not have the force of law, they certainly provide insight as to CMS interpretation of the Act. CMS Memoranda make it clear that CMS interprets the Medicare Secondary Payer Act to require parties to a liability settlement to protect Medicare s interests with respect to future medical expense. Unlike workers compensation, CMS has not promulgated regulations specifically raising or identifying any such duty. CMS has, however, promulgated such regulations regarding workers compensation claims. 42 C.F.R Although similar regulations have not been enacted with respect to liability cases, the Medicare Secondary Payer Manual was amended to include a definition for liability Medicare Set-Asides, Medicare Secondary Payer Manual, Chapter 1, 20. The manual defines Set- Aside arrangements to include "liability and no fault cases." It further provides that there "should be no recovery of benefits paid for services rendered after the date of a liability settlement." Medicare Secondary Payer Manual, Chapter 7, Contractor MSP Recovery Rules, 50.5 (2009). Therefore, these provisions can be read to suggest that the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services believes there is a general obligation to protect Medicare s interests with regard to future medical expenses and that such protection can be provided through the use of a liability MSA. On June 15, 2012, the Federal Register published proposed regulations from Medicare with regard to "future medicals" and the settlement of liability and auto liability claims. These proposed regulations had been anticipated for quite some time. In 1994 the Department of Healthcare & Human Services adopted regulations with regard to workers compensation claims. This lead to what is commonly known as Medicare Set-Aside accounts. Until 2012 Medicare had not attempted to promulgate any such regulations with regard to liability and auto liability claims. In fact, one of the arguments as to why we may not need to do Medicare Set-Asides in liability cases is the fact that regulations had never been promulgated. That is about to change. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has maintained for many years that we had a duty to protect Medicare s interests with regard to future medical expense under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. It is clear that these proposed regulations do not create a new duty but rather provide standards and procedures to meet an existing duty under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. Ultimately, it is anticipated that the scope of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act with regard to future medicals and liability claims will be litigated. The Medicare Secondary Payer Act does not specifically refer to any obligation as to protecting Medicare with regard to future medical expense. CMS, however, has interpreted the Medicare Secondary Payer Act as, in fact, requiring H-6

7 protection of Medicare as to future injury-related medical expenses. The CMS interpretation of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act is stated in the proposed rules. The proposed regulations as published in the Federal Register set forth seven options by which settling parties may protect Medicare s interests with regard to future medical expenses. Which options are available in a particular claim will depend upon whether the claimant is a current Medicare beneficiary or an individual who is not yet Medicare eligible. Note that under the workers compensation standard the "future beneficiaries" are those persons with an expectation of Medicare enrollment within 30 months. An expectation of Medicare enrollment within 30 months exists where the claimant has applied for Social Security Disability, applied for Social Security Disability and been denied, is 62 ½ years of age or older, claimant has end stage renal disease or has Lou Gehrig s disease. Options one through four are available to both current beneficiaries as well as claimants who are not yet Medicare beneficiaries. Options five through seven are only available for current Medicare beneficiaries. A. Option One Beneficiary chooses to pay for all related future medical care until settlement is exhausted. Note that this is a position Medicare has maintained for several years that if a Medicare Set-Aside is not used in a liability settlement, the Medicare beneficiary should spend the entirety of their settlement on future medical care arising from the claim that would otherwise be covered by Medicare. Once settlement funds are exhausted Medicare will begin covering injury-related expenses. Beneficiary may solicit from CMS a compromise or waiver of recovery. Comment: It is unclear whether this option is an attempt to accommodate cases in which there is a substantial compromise settlement of the liability claim. Traditionally in workers compensation we have had to fund the entire amount of future medical expense even where there is substantial compromise of the underlying workers compensation claim. This may be an attempt by Medicare to show a more reasonable approach to expedite disposition of settlements involving substantial compromise and account for issues of comparative fault. The period for public comment ended August 14, While these are only proposed regulations at this juncture, it can reasonably be anticipated that the final regulations will retain substantial elements of the proposal. B. Option Two Medicare will not pursue future medicals if all of the following conditions are met: H-7

8 a) or, the accident, illness or injury occurred one year or more before the date of settlement; claim did not involve chronic illness nor major trauma; claimant does not receive additional settlements and there is no corresponding workers compensation or no fault insurance claim; b) settlement is less than a defined amount (to be determined); claimant is not a current beneficiary at the time of settlement; claimant does not expect to become a beneficiary within 30 months; claim does not involve chronic illness or major trauma; beneficiary does not receive additional settlements; claimant does not have a corresponding workers compensation or no fault insurance claim. Comment: Note that this standard is broader than used in workers compensation claims. In workers compensation claims Medicare Set-Asides are only used when the claimant is either a beneficiary or has a reasonable expectation of Medicare enrollment within 30 months. Under b, it is implied that there would be a duty to protect Medicare s interests even if there is not an expectation of Medicare enrollment within 30 months in those cases involving chronic illness and major trauma. C. Option Three A) Before settlement; where physician attests that the claimant has completed treatment and that future medical care related to the settlement is not expected, then no duty to further protect Medicare s interests regarding future medical expense; B) After settlement; where treating physician attests that treatment has been completed and future treatment is not anticipated then Medicare will limit its recovery to conditional payments prior to settlement and medical expenses incurred between the date of settlement and the date of completion of care. D. Option Four The individual/beneficiary submits a proposed Medicare Set-Aside arrangement (MSA) to CMS for their review and CMS approves the proposed Medicare Set-Aside arrangement. E. Option Five The beneficiary participates in one of Medicare s "recovery options." Those include: H-8

9 Settlement of $ or less and beneficiary does not expect to receive additional settlements; Fixed payment options; settlement of $5,000 or less and beneficiary does not expect to receive additional settlements related to the incident. Medicare will be protected by paying Medicare 25 percent of the gross settlement amount; Self calculated conditional payment option. If physical trauma-based injury occurred six months prior to election of this option and settlement is $25,000 or less the claimant can select a self calculation option to identify the amount necessary to protect Medicare s interests as to future medical expense. Comment: The self calculation formula is not set forth in the proposed rules but has been previously identified by CMS in Memoranda. F. Option Six Upfront Payment: A) If ongoing responsibility for medicals exists and medicals are calculated through the life of the beneficiary or life of the injury, then Medicare may accept an upfront lump sum payment for the calculated cost of all future medical care. B) If the beneficiary obtains a settlement and an ongoing responsibility for medicals was not imposed or accepted by the defendant, then the beneficiary may elect to make an upfront payment to Medicare in the amount of a specified percentage of the beneficiary proceeds. Comment: The calculation would essentially be the total dollar amount of settlement minus attorney s fees, procurement costs, conditional payments and out-of-pocket medical expense. G. Option Seven Compromise or Waiver of Recovery: Beneficiary may solicit from CMS a compromise or waiver of recovery. Comment: It is unclear whether this option is an attempt to accommodate cases in which there is a substantial compromise settlement of the liability claim. Traditionally in workers compensation we have had to fund the entire amount of future medical expense even where there is substantial compromise of the underlying workers compensation claim. This may be an attempt by Medicare to show a more reasonable approach to expedite disposition of settlements involving substantial compromise and account for issues of comparative fault. H-9

10 II. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS BETWEEN CMS LIABILITY REGULATIONS AND STATE TORT LAW PRINCIPLES: It was widely anticipated that the Department of Healthcare and Human Services would issue final regulations within months of its issuance of the proposed regulations in June To date, final regulations have yet to be approved and published. It is quite likely that the delay is attributable to the vagueness of the proposed regulations, as well as the complexity of requiring litigants to undertake an injury severity scoring analysis in order to determine whether their claim involved a chronic injury or major trauma. It is clear that once these regulations are finalized and published, the use of Medicare Set-Asides will become common place in liability settlements. One of the primary concerns with CMS requiring liability MSAs is the failure of the CMS proposed regulations to accommodate various issues of state tort law principles. State law regarding comparative fault often has a substantial impact on the settlement and verdict value of a personal injury case. The proposed regulations by CMS regarding liability MSAs fail to recognize and accommodate the compromise nature of most personal injury liability settlements. Cases are often settled for substantially less than full value. This includes compromise with regard to future medical expense. The current proposed rules would create a substantial impediment to settlement of personal injury claims where compromise is necessary based on issues of disputed negligence and comparative fault. Without such an accommodation by CMS the proposed regulations, if enacted, would have a chilling effect on personal injury settlements. The current proposed regulations would set forth standards that appear contrary to the public policy in favor of settlements. Due process concerns also arise under the proposed regulations. In the field of workers compensation, CMS has not provided any procedural means by which parties may review or appeal the rejection of a proposed Medicare Set-Aside allocation. Workers compensation MSAs are frequently rejected by CMS and returned with a finding by CMS that a higher allocation is required. Parties are left with a "take it or leave it" approach by CMS and have no legal means through which to challenge a CMS determination. Due process requires that CMS include administrative review rights as a part of any policy or procedure regarding personal injury MSAs. III. MEDICARE SET-ASIDE ARRANGEMENTS, FUNDING AND ADMINISTRATION A Medicare Set-Aside account is an account that is created and funded from a settlement for the purpose of paying future injury-related medical expenses. The Medicare beneficiary pays future injury-related medical expenses until the Medicare Set-Aside is exhausted. Once exhausted, Medicare will then begin paying for any additional injury-related treatment. Where an MSA is properly funded and expenses are properly paid out and accounted for then Medicare will cover injury-related medical expenses when the MSA is exhausted. This applies H-10

11 regardless of whether the MSA is funded entirely up front with a lump sum or is partially funded with future periodic payments. The amount of a Medicare Set-Aside should be an amount sufficient to pay for all reasonably anticipated and causally related medical bills for the life expectancy of the claimant, Patel Memorandum: Funding should be based upon Medicare covered amounts for such future medical expenses, Walters Memorandum: Where an MSA is funded with future payments through an annuity or structured settlement, the MSA will initially be funded with "seed money" representing the first two years of medical expense which would otherwise be covered by Medicare. Future annuity payments would then be paid into the MSA for the petitioner s life expectancy. If the MSA funds are exhausted during a given year and prior to the next annuity payment, Medicare will pay injury-related expenses until the next annuity payment is made. MSAs can either be administered by the claimant or a professional administrator. Where self-administered, it is important for the claimant to have an understanding of the accounting and reporting requirements for the MSA. If MSA proceeds are inappropriately spent, Medicare will deny coverage until such funds are replaced in the MSA and properly expended and accounted for. MSA funds must be placed in an interest bearing account that is separate from any other personal or checking account. If the claimant has a reasonable expectation of Medicare enrollment within 30 months but is not yet a Medicare beneficiary they cannot use MSA funds for injury-related expenses until they become a Medicare beneficiary. In addition, MSA funds can only be used for those expenses that would otherwise be covered by Medicare. Claimants who have questions as to whether a medical item or service is covered under Medicare may consult with Medicare by contacting Medicare. The administrator of the MSA account will be responsible for properly accounting for MSA funds. The administrator must annually account and attest that payment from the MSA account was only made for injury related expenses that would otherwise be reimbursable by Medicare. The annual accounting is provided to the CMS lead Medicare contractor and shall continue until the MSA account is depleted. Very limited administrative expense items can be deducted from the MSA. Administrative fees that can be deducted from the MSA include photo copy charges, mailing and postage as well as bank fees. Where the MSA is administered by a professional administrator or a trustee or custodian the professional fees associated with administration may not be deducted from the MSA. H-11

12 IV. CASE LAW UPDATE A. Court Enforces Settlement Where Conditional Payments Exceed Total Settlement Amount Rhoades v. Beck, 260 Or. App. 569, 320 P.3d 593 (2014). The plaintiff filed a personal injury action and alleged that she incurred medical expenses of $45, Shortly before trial, the parties settled the case for $15,000 to the plaintiff and $5,500 to the plaintiff s husband. The settlement terms included that the plaintiff would satisfy any liens from settlement proceeds and that they would hold harmless the defendant s auto insurance carrier from any claims of lien. Following settlement, Medicare asserted a conditional payments lien of $22, Plaintiffs refused to sign the settlement agreement unless Medicare agreed to waive their lien. Defendants brought an action seeking an order requiring the plaintiff to sign documents necessary to complete the settlement. The trial court agreed with the defendant and entered an order granting defendant s motion. On appeal, the Oregon Appellate Court affirmed. Plaintiffs argued that the amount of the Medicare lien was a material term that was not known at time of the settlement and therefore, the settlement should be set aside. The appellate court disagreed finding that the parties correspondence established that they had a meeting of the minds and that the plaintiff contractually agreed to settle her personal injury claim for $15,000 (excluding loss of consortium to husband) and that she would hold the defendant harmless from all liens. The practical affect is that the entirety of the $15,000 settlement (minus attorney s fees and expenses) is owed to Medicare in partial satisfaction of its conditional payments lien. B. Court Refuses to Issue Advisory Opinion as to Whether a Liability MSA is Necessary Early v. Carnival Corp., No CIV, 2013 WL (S.D. Fla. Feb. 7, 2013). A cruise ship passenger filed a personal injury action in federal court against Carnival Corporation. The parties could not agree as to whether an MSA was needed and therefore, they agreed to settle for an undisclosed sum and then address with the court whether an MSA was needed. The defendant filed a motion with the court arguing that an MSA was necessary under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. The court refused to address the issue, indicating that whether an MSA was required was a material term of settlement and the court refused to issue an advisory opinion on the matter. C. Where Claimant Died Prior to MSA Funding Court Orders Defendant to Pay MSA Seed Money, but Defendant is not Required to Fund Annuity Portion of the MSA Holmes v. Solon Automated Svcs., 752 S.E.2d 179 (N.C. App. 2013). In Holmes, the North Carolina Industrial Commission issued an award in the petitioner s favor. Subsequently the parties entered into a voluntary mediation. As a result of the mediation, a mediation settlement agreement was prepared. The settlement terms included funding a Medicare Set-Aside account H-12

13 in the amount of $186, with $19, in seed money and issuance of an annuity with future payments of $9, payable for 18 years if "living." Prior to funding of the MSA, the petitioner died. The petitioner s beneficiaries demanded funding of the MSA, including the seed money and annuity. Defendants objected, indicating that the funding of future medical expense through an MSA was now unnecessary as the petitioner was deceased. They argued that the seed money should not be funded as no future medical treatment will be incurred and that the annuity should not issue as a contingency of the annuity was that the petitioner was "living." The Indiana Workers Compensation Commission agreed with the defendants. The appellate court held that the annuity and settlement agreement contained a contingency of "if living" and if said contingency is not met, then no annuity payments are due and owed. As to the seed money, the appellate court noted that survival was not a condition under the settlement agreement and therefore, defendants were responsible for paying the seed money as an element of settlement notwithstanding that the petitioner was deceased. D. Medicare s Refusal to Compromise Conditional Payments Runs Contrary to the Public Policy in Favor of Settlements Bradley v. Sebelius, 621 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 2010). A potentially important decision concerning Medicare conditional payments (liens) was handed down on September 29, 2010 by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (California). Medicare (CMS) occasionally takes the position that it will not compromise its conditional payments even if the end result would be Medicare taking all of the settlement (minus attorney s fees). In Bradley, CMS took just such a position. The court of appeals, however, took exception and affirmed a substantial reduction in the conditional payments lien. In Bradley, the probate court was asked to apportion the settlement amount between Medicare and non-medicare beneficiaries. The settlement amount was substantially less than the potential full value of the claim. The probate court effectively reduced the Medicare lien from $38, to $ Medicare refused to accept the probate court s ruling. After the estate exhausted administrative remedies, the decision was appealed to the federal district court. The district court reversed, relying, in part, upon arguments by Medicare that pursuant to the Medicare Field Manual, its conditional payment lien was not subject to compromise based on allocation of fault. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court, noting "[h]istorically, there is a strong public interest in the expeditious resolution of lawsuits through settlement." Bradley, 621 F.3d at The court stated: Id. The Secretary s position would have a chilling effect on settlement. The Secretary s position compels plaintiffs to force their tort claims to trial, burdening the court system. It is a financial disincentive to accept otherwise reasonable settlement offers. It would allow tortfeasors to escape responsibility. H-13

14 The court further found that Medicare s reliance on its field manual was unpersuasive, pointing out that Medicare policies and manuals are not "law" and would not be given deference under the Chevron Doctrine. The Bradley case is particularly noteworthy because the Eleventh Circuit stated that Medicare cannot take an unreasonable position with regard to their liens that would thwart the public policy in favor of settlements. This case will likely be widely cited in future efforts seeking compromise of Medicare conditional payments. The public policy analysis used by the court in Bradley could also be extended to civil cases where the parties choose to use a Medicare Set-Aside for future medical care. If a defendant wants to use a Medicare Set-Aside to protect itself from further claims by Medicare under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, this case could provide a basis upon which to formulate a compromise value of the MSA. If, for example, the plaintiff reasonably appears to be 30 percent at-fault and the case is settled for 70 cents on the dollar with an MSA for future medical expense, the MSA could reasonably be reduced by 30 percent under the analysis employed in Bradley. Under that scenario, a good faith hearing should be held requesting the court to enter an order apportioning/compromising the MSA to a reasonable amount given the facts and circumstances of the case. While we are in uncharted territory with regard to use of Medicare Set-Aside accounts in civil cases, the Bradley decision suggests that the judiciary will not hesitate to impose practical solutions to facilitate equitable settlements. In other words, this holding is a very positive development since it may result in more prompt resolution of compromised claims. E. Conditional Payments Claim by CMS Attaches to Settlement of Wrongful Death Claim Where Medical Expenses are an Element of Damages In Benson v. Sebelius, 771 F. Supp. 2d 68 (D.C. 2011), the plaintiff in a wrongful death action sought a court declaration that CMS was not entitled to recovery of conditional payments from a wrongful death settlement. The wrongful death settlement included a claim for medical expenses under state law. The court held that Medicare was entitled to reimbursement of its conditional payments from the proceeds of settlement. The court noted that the settlement of the wrongful death action expressly included satisfaction of medical expenses of the decedent. The court distinguished Bradley v. Sebelius, 621 F.3d 1330 (11th Circuit 2010) noting that in Bradley there was a specific allocation between medical and non-medical elements of the settlement and as such CMS recovery of conditional payments was limited to the amount of the settlement that was allocated to the estate as opposed to those settlement funds allocated to compensate beneficiaries. Accordingly, parties to a settlement where conditional payments exist should negotiate as an element of settlement an allocation between medical and non-medical elements of the settlement. In states such as Illinois, that would involve an allocation between the wrongful H-14

15 death elements of settlement (non-medical) and the survival action which contain claims for medical expense. F. Where Medical Expense is Not an Element of Damage in Wrongful Death Action Conditional Payments Lien Does Not Attach In Hall v. United Security, 2012 IL App (1st) U, the plaintiff brought an Illinois wrongful death action arising out of the death of his mother. The court addressed whether a Medicare conditional payments claim would attach to the wrongful death settlement. The court noted that under the Illinois Wrongful Death Act damages are limited to a survivor s grief, sorrow and mental suffering. The plaintiff did not bring a survival action or seek damages relating to the decedent s medical expenses. As such, the court held that Medicare s lien did not attach to the settlement and Medicare need not be placed on the settlement draft as a payee. G. Sixth Circuit Fails to Apply Comparative Fault Principles to CMS Conditional Payments Claim Hadden v. United States, 661 F.3d 298 (6th Cir. 2011) In this case the plaintiff, Vernon Hadden, was struck by a utility vehicle belonging to Pennyrile Rural Electric Cooperative that swerved to avoid a vehicle that ran a stop sign. The driver of the vehicle that ran the stop sign was never identified. Hadden brought suit against Pennyrile for bodily injury. Ultimately, Hadden and Pennyrile settled the case for $125,000. Hadden s counsel asserted that the settlement amount was approximately 10 percent of the total value of the claim and that the missing driver of the vehicle that ran the stop sign was 90 percent negligent. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services asserted a conditional payments claim for $62, Hadden s counsel sought a compromise and waiver or reduction of the conditional payments amount from CMS. CMS refused to compromise the amount of its claim. Plaintiff s counsel argued that Hadden s recovery was reduced under applicable comparative fault principles and that CMS claim for conditional payments should be similarly reduced. CMS and the Department of Health and Human Services rejected the request for compromise and waiver. CMS pointed out that recoveries under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act did not account for state tort law. Hadden s counsel exhausted administrative appeals and ultimately filed suit in the federal district court for the Western Division of Kentucky. The district court rejected Hadden s arguments and noted that the underlying personal injury claim against Pennyrile Rural Electric had not proceeded to trial and accordingly the allocation of fault was purely speculative. On appeal the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals allowed Medicare to recover 100 percent of its claimed conditional payments demand relying upon what the court deemed to be the "plain language" of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act 42 U.S.C. 1395y(b)(2)(B)(ii). The Medicare Secondary Payer Act provides in part: H-15

16 [A] primary plan, and an entity that receives payment from a primary plan, shall reimburse the appropriate Trust Fund for any payment made by the Secretary under this subchapter with respect to an item or service if it is demonstrated that such primary plan has or had a responsibility to make payment with respect to such item or service... The Hadden court found that a settlement through a primary plan (liability policy) demonstrates "responsibility" under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act thereby entitling Medicare to recover its full conditional payment amount notwithstanding that a settlement is for a compromised or reduced amount. The court concluded that since Hadden received the full amount of his medical expenses from the defendant, he was therefore responsible to reimburse Medicare for the full amount of the conditional payments. The court further rejected Hadden s argument that the conditional payment amount should be reduced based on equitable allocation principles. Hadden argued that principles of comparative fault resulted in a compromise settlement and those same principles should be equitably applied to the conditional payments amount. Such principles had previously been applied by the U.S. Supreme Court in Arkansas Department of Health and Human Svcs. v. Ahlborn, 547 U.S. 268, 126 S. Ct (2006), in the context of a lien by Medicaid. The Hadden decision will potentially have a chilling effect on settlements. Settlement may be particularly problematic where Medicare pays a substantial sum in medical expense yet the settlement value of the claim is substantially compromised based upon issues of liability and comparative fault. Similar difficulties may be encountered where there are substantial medical bills and a $100,000 liability limit under the liability policy. In such instances, litigants should argue that the principles of Bradley v. Sebelius, 621 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 2010) justify a reduction and compromise in the conditional payments amount. The Eleventh Circuit s decision in Bradley and the Sixth Circuit s decision in Hadden stand in partial conflict and undoubtedly additional circuits will be weighing in. H. Attorney s Fees Allowed on Portion of Settlement Allocated for Liability Medicare Set-Aside Account In Hinsinger v. Showboat Atlantic City, 420 N.J. Super 15 (App. 2011), a plaintiff s attorney filed a motion for attorney s fees from the amount allocated toward a liability Medicare Set-Aside trust after the trial and award in a civil action. The parties allocated the sum of $180,600 toward a Medicare Set-Aside trust. The plaintiff s attorney sought an attorney s fee on that portion of the settlement. The court noted that the Code of Federal Regulations at 42 C.F.R allows for a reduction in conditional payment amounts for the cost of procurement (including attorney s fees). Although 42 C.F.R does not specifically address future medical expenses and Medicare Set-Aside accounts, the court found that section instructive. The court, therefore, allowed the Medicare Set-Aside trust to be reduced by the claimed attorney s fees. H-16

17 I. Court Approves Liability Medicare Set-Aside as Reasonably Protecting Medicare s Interests In Cribb v. Sulzer Metco (U.S.) Inc., No. 4:09-CV-141-FL, 2012 WL (E.D.N.C. Sept. 5, 2012) the plaintiff brought an uncontested motion before the court to approve a settlement with an allocation for a Medicare Set-Aside in the amount of $4,330. Upon conducting an evidentiary hearing, the court found the allocation for future medical expense to be reasonable and approved the allocation for the Medicate Set-Aside account. The court pointed out that CMS provides no procedure through which parties can determine whether an allocation sufficiently protects Medicare s interests as to future medical expense. The court noted that there is a strong public policy in favor of settlements and proceeded to approve the allocation. J. Court Approves Medical Benefits Class Action Settlement Recognizing Obligation to Satisfy Conditional Payments and Protect Medicare as to Future Medical Expense In the case of In re Oil Spill by the Oil Rig Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20, 2010, 295 F.R.D. 112 (E.D. La. 2013), the Federal District Court for the Eastern Division of Louisiana recently approved a settlement involving medical benefits for class members arising out of the Deepwater Horizon drilling disaster. Objections had been raised by class members with regard to the need to protect Medicare s interests regarding conditional payments as well as future medical expense. In approving the settlement, the court noted that Medicare was entitled to reimbursement from the settlement fund for conditional payments pursuant to the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. More importantly, the court specifically addressed the issue of future medical expense and protecting Medicare by noting that the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services has proposed regulations regarding "future medicals" in the settlement of liability claims. The court noted that Medicare must be protected with respect to future medical expenses citing Medicare s advanced notice of purposed rule making as published in the Federal Register in June In addition, the court noted that the settlement agreement was also properly designed to protect beneficiaries and the proposed rights of insurers under the Medicare Advantage and Medicare Prescription Drug (Part D) Plan. K. Court Requires Plaintiff s Disclosure of Information Necessary for SCHIP Reporting In Libby v. Lake, No. 2:11-CV-152-JAW, 2012 WL (D. Me. 2012) defendants insisted, as a part of settlement, that the plaintiffs provide information necessary in order to perform a Medicare query to ascertain the plaintiff s Medicare status. They pointed out that the query was necessary in order to determine whether the claim was reportable under the Section 111 SCHIP reporting requirements. Plaintiffs objected arguing that the plaintiff was not eligible for Medicare and was not a Medicare beneficiary. Notwithstanding, defendants required that the information be provided including the plaintiff s Social Security number etc., so that they could verify the Medicare status through a Medicare query. The court agreed with the defendants and found that the requested information was both legitimate and appropriate. The court noted that H-17

18 the insurer was required by law to report payments to CMS or otherwise be subjected to potential penalties. The court specifically noted that CMS required the insurers to determine the plaintiff s Medicare status and the plaintiff s refusal to provide the requested information was unreasonable. L. Court Refuses Attempt to Discount Conditional Payments Claim Based on Compromise Nature of Settlement In Mason v. Sebelius, No , 2012 WL (D.N.J. 2012) the plaintiff sought to recover, in part, disputed reimbursement for conditional payments that had been paid under protest in The plaintiff argued that reimbursement to Medicare was disproportionate to the total recovery received in the tort action. The plaintiff relied, in part, upon the United States Supreme Court s decision in Arkansas Department of Health and Human Svcs. v. Ahlborn, 547 U.S. 268, 126 S. Ct (2006). The court refused to follow the Ahlborn precedent noting that the Ahlborn case was decided based upon construction of specific language under the Medicaid statute. The court found that although the plaintiff may have settled for less than his actual damages, Medicare was not required to accept a reduced amount in satisfaction of its conditional payments lien. M. Insurer Did Not Act in Bad Faith by Placing Medicare on Settlement Draft In Porter v. Farmer s Insurance Co., Inc., No. 10-CV-116-GKF-PJC, 2012 WL (N.D. Okla. 2012), Aff d by 505 Fed. Appx. 787, an insured brought an uninsured motorist claim against its insurer, Farmer s Insurance Company. When settled, Farmer s Insurance Company issued a three party check payable to the plaintiff, plaintiff s counsel and Medicare. Ultimately, it was established that Medicare was not asserting a subrogation claim and did not have a conditional payments claim and, therefore, Farmer s agreed to reissue the draft without being payable to Medicare. Plaintiff then brought a bad faith and breach of contract action against Farmer s Insurance asserting that Farmer s improperly issued the original draft with Medicare as a payee. The district court disagreed, finding that it was not bad faith and noting that the laws and regulations regarding reimbursement to Medicare have harsh consequences for insurers. They also noted that there was confusion with regard to communications with Medicare as to whether they had a subrogation claim or conditional payments lien. On appeal, the court of appeals affirmed noting that Farmer s acted reasonably and had a legitimate concern with regard to protecting Medicare s interests. N. Court Rejects Defendant s Attempt to Require a Medicare Set-Aside as an Element of Settlement. In Sipler v. Trans Am Trucking, Inc., 881 F. Supp. 2d 635 (D.N.J. 2012), a settlement was reached in a personal injury action and the defendant presented the plaintiff with a release that, in part, established a Medicare Set-Aside with a portion of the settlement proceeds. Plaintiff objected and brought an action to enforce the settlement. The federal district court found that there was no federal law requiring Medicare Set-Asides in personal injury settlements. Although the court H-18

19 noted that Medicare Set-Asides are prudent in the context of workers compensation claims they are unworkable in the personal injury context. The court noted that it would be unduly burdensome to require that parties apportion future medical expense in personal injury settlements. The court further found that requiring a Medicare Set-Aside would frustrate the public policy in favor of settlements. V. MMSEA SECTION 111 REPORTING The Medicare/Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 imposed a duty on insurers to report to Medicare payments made to Medicare beneficiaries. Collectively, these are referred to as Non-Group Health Plans (NGHP). Such Non-Group Health Plan insurers are obligated to notify Medicare about "settlements, judgments, awards or other payment from liability insurers (including self insurers), no fault insurers and workers compensation" received by or on behalf of Medicare beneficiaries, MMSEA Section 111 Mandatory Insurer Reporting Quick Reference Guide Version 1, January 19, The reporting requirements became effective May 1, However, due to software difficulties, reporting of workers compensation claims did not commence until 2011 and the reporting of liability settlements began January 1, When a liability or workers compensation case is settled involving a Medicare beneficiary, the insurer is obligated to report that settlement to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The insurers are identified as "responsible reporting entities" (RREs) as are self insureds. The RREs are to report information when the insurer assumes an ongoing responsibility for medicals (ORM) or after paying the total payment obligation to the claimant (TPOC) in the form of a settlement, judgment, award or other payment. Simply stated, the trigger for reporting is the issuance of payment to the claimant or satisfaction of medical expense. Numerous data elements must be submitted to CMS as a part of the Section 111 reporting. Data includes, but is not limited to, evidence of insurance coverage, applicable settlements, judgments, awards, or other payments regardless of whether there is an admission or determination of liability. Additional information to be submitted includes the Medicare health insurance claim number or Social Security number, claimant s name, date of birth, gender, and other information including the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Version (ICD-9) diagnosis codes. As a result of Section 111 reporting, CMS will become aware of workers compensation and civil settlements involving Medicare beneficiaries. The purpose is, in part, to identify insurers and self insureds that may have "primary" responsibility for payment under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. In the field of workers compensation, Medicare Set-Asides have been used for several years to provide funds to satisfy future medical expenses that are closed out under a workers compensation settlement. Those funds are to be used for future medical expenses as opposed to submitting bills to Medicare. Now that CMS is aware of settlement details under Section 111 H-19

20 reporting they have begun denying Medicare coverage to beneficiaries where bills are submitted that relate to the workers compensation injury. It is plausible that the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services may take the same approach with regard to liability settlements and judgments. Whether they will limit such action to cases where there is a specific allocation for future medical expense in the settlement or judgment is to be determined. The insurance industry and litigants are watching closely for the next indication from CMS as to how they may respond once provided the Section 111 reporting data. VI. THE SMART ACT MEDICARE REFORMS BECOME LAW In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the SMART Act. The SMART Act provides for significant reforms to the Medicare conditional payment process. CMS will now be required to provide parties with binding conditional payment amounts prior to settlement and further allows for the review and appeal of conditional payment disputes. The Act also amends the SCHIP Reporting Act with regard to potential penalties. Key provisions to the Act include the following: A. Determination of Conditional Payment Amount (Effective 9 Months After Enactment) The claimant or applicable plan (insurers) will be allowed to notify the Secretary for HHS within 120 days before the reasonably expected date of settlement, judgment, award or other payment. Upon notification the parties will be able to obtain a statement of the conditional payment amount through a website to be created by HHS. Where notice is provided to HHS within 120 days of settlement, judgment, award or other payment, CMS will have 65 days to produce a conditional demand letter. CMS may seek a 30-day extension of that deadline. Once the conditional payment amount is downloaded during this period the conditional payment amount shall be deemed the final conditional payment amount. B. Reconsideration of Conditional Payment Amount If the claimant, representative or applicable plan disagrees with the conditional payment amount they may seek review by providing CMS with documentation identifying the discrepancies and further provide a proposal to resolve the discrepancy. In essence, the claimant, representative or applicable plan would submit documentation as to what they believe the proper conditional payment amount should be. The Secretary of HHS will have 11 business days upon receipt of such documentation and proposal to determine whether there is a reasonable basis to amend its conditional payments claim. If the Secretary of HHS does not make such a determination within 11 business days, then the proposal submitted by the claimant, representative or applicable plan shall be deemed accepted by HHS. If the Secretary of HHS determines within 11 business days that there is not a discrepancy, then the Secretary must respond by providing documentation and show good cause why they are not H-20

MEDICARE SET-ASIDES AND CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS UPDATE

MEDICARE SET-ASIDES AND CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS UPDATE MEDICARE SET-ASIDES AND CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS UPDATE Presented and Prepared by: Bradford J. Peterson bpeterson@heylroyster.com Urbana, Illinois 217.344.0060 Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen PEORIA SPRINGFIELD

More information

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT MEDICARE LIENS, CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS, AND SET ASIDE TRUSTS

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT MEDICARE LIENS, CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS, AND SET ASIDE TRUSTS WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT MEDICARE LIENS, CONDITIONAL PAYMENTS, AND SET ASIDE TRUSTS Presented and Prepared by: Bradford J. Peterson bpeterson@heylroyster.com Urbana, Illinois 217.344.0060 The cases

More information

New Medicare Reporting Requirements for Entities Paying Settlements or Judgments To Personal Injury Plaintiffs Who Are Medicare Beneficiaries

New Medicare Reporting Requirements for Entities Paying Settlements or Judgments To Personal Injury Plaintiffs Who Are Medicare Beneficiaries New Medicare Reporting Requirements for Entities Paying Settlements or Judgments To Personal Injury Plaintiffs Who Are Medicare Beneficiaries By Pamela W. Montgomery, R.N., J.D., LL.M. candidate (Health

More information

Best Practices for Complying with New Medicare Reporting Requirements What Every Attorney Needs to Know By Ervin A. Gonzalez, Esq.

Best Practices for Complying with New Medicare Reporting Requirements What Every Attorney Needs to Know By Ervin A. Gonzalez, Esq. Best Practices for Complying with New Medicare Reporting Requirements What Every Attorney Needs to Know By Ervin A. Gonzalez, Esq. I. Overview: How does the MMSEA impact personal injury and mass tort settlements?

More information

NEGOTIATING WITH MEDICARE AND MEDICAID

NEGOTIATING WITH MEDICARE AND MEDICAID NEGOTIATING WITH MEDICARE AND MEDICAID I. MEDICARE PROVIDES HEALTHCARE COVERAGE A. Persons 65 Years Old and Older B. Certain Disabled Persons under 65 C. Persons with End-Stage Renal Disease II. MEDICARE

More information

MEDICARE AND LIABILITY CASES. A. The Medicare Secondary Payer Statute

MEDICARE AND LIABILITY CASES. A. The Medicare Secondary Payer Statute MEDICARE AND LIABILITY CASES I. The Significant Statutory and Code Provisions A. The Medicare Secondary Payer Statute The Medicare Secondary Payer statute (MSP) has been the law for well over 25 years.

More information

SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST NEWSLETTER

SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST NEWSLETTER SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST NEWSLETTER SEPTEMBER 2009 A. KEL LONG, III P.C. 3060 Peachtree Rd., Suite 1725 Atlanta, GA 30305 404 238 0174 AKL3PC@mindspring.com www.akellong.com For this edition of the newsletter,

More information

MEDICARE REPORTING AND RECOVERY UPDATE

MEDICARE REPORTING AND RECOVERY UPDATE CLIENT UPDATE JULY 2012 MEDICARE REPORTING AND RECOVERY UPDATE MMSEA SECTION 111 REPORTING RRES NOT LIMITED TO QUARTERLY REPORTING Responsible Reporting Entities (RREs) were previously required to submit

More information

MEDICARE AND MEDICAID AVOIDING POST-JUDGMENT AND POST-SETTLEMENT LITIGATION WORKERS COMPENSATION AND MEDICARE SET ASIDE ISSUES

MEDICARE AND MEDICAID AVOIDING POST-JUDGMENT AND POST-SETTLEMENT LITIGATION WORKERS COMPENSATION AND MEDICARE SET ASIDE ISSUES MEDICARE AND MEDICAID AVOIDING POST-JUDGMENT AND POST-SETTLEMENT LITIGATION WORKERS COMPENSATION AND MEDICARE SET ASIDE ISSUES INTRODUCTION Over the last 10 years workers compensation practitioners have

More information

ISSUES ARISING OUT OF THE MEDICARE SECONDARY PAYER ACT

ISSUES ARISING OUT OF THE MEDICARE SECONDARY PAYER ACT ISSUES ARISING OUT OF THE MEDICARE SECONDARY PAYER ACT BY EUGENE J. PODESTA, JR. BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ 165 Madison Avenue, Suite 2000 Memphis, TN 38103 Rising medical costs and

More information

Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States No. 11-1197 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- VERNON HADDEN,

More information

SUBROGATION AND MSAs. Settlement of W/C Claim As Part of Third Party Settlement Commutation/Dollar Contracts, Etc.

SUBROGATION AND MSAs. Settlement of W/C Claim As Part of Third Party Settlement Commutation/Dollar Contracts, Etc. MEDICARE SET-ASIDES AND THE SUBROGATION PROFESSIONAL Presented By: Gary L. Wickert, Matthiesen, Wickert & Lehrer, S.C. Russell S. Whittle, Gould & Lamb, LLC GOTOWEBINAR ATTENDEE INTERFACE 1. Viewer Window

More information

LIEN ON ME. A Guide to Complying with Medicare s Secondary Payor Act and Pennsylvania s Act 44. April, 2009

LIEN ON ME. A Guide to Complying with Medicare s Secondary Payor Act and Pennsylvania s Act 44. April, 2009 LIEN ON ME A Guide to Complying with Medicare s Secondary Payor Act and Pennsylvania s Act 44 April, 2009 HARRISBURG OFFICE P.O. Box 932 Harrisburg, PA 17106-0932 717-975-8114 PITTSBURGH OFFICE 525 William

More information

SPECIAL TOPICS IN GUARDIANSHIP COMPROMISING CLAIMS FOR MINORS AND INCAPACITATED ADULTS. November 8, 2013

SPECIAL TOPICS IN GUARDIANSHIP COMPROMISING CLAIMS FOR MINORS AND INCAPACITATED ADULTS. November 8, 2013 SPECIAL TOPICS IN GUARDIANSHIP COMPROMISING CLAIMS FOR MINORS AND INCAPACITATED ADULTS November 8, 2013 Stephanie F. Brown McMickle, Kurey & Branch 200 South Main Street Alpharetta, GA 30009 (678) 824-7800

More information

Impediments to Settlement

Impediments to Settlement Impediments to Settlement W. Bruce Barrickman, Esq. 5775 Glenridge Drive Suite E100 Atlanta, GA 30328 678-222-0248 www.bayadr.com IMPEDIMENTS TO SETTLEMENT W. Bruce Barrickman, Esq. Mediation is a great

More information

Liability Set Asides Why There is a Need for Codification

Liability Set Asides Why There is a Need for Codification Liability Set Asides Why There is a Need for Codification Jason D. Lazarus, Esq. For many years personal injury cases have been resolved without consideration of Medicare s secondary payer status even

More information

Medicare Indemnity and Defense by Federal Mandate?

Medicare Indemnity and Defense by Federal Mandate? Medicare Indemnity and Defense by Federal Mandate? Christian R. Johnson Ebanks Horne Rota Moos LLP 1301 McKinney, Suite 2700 Houston, TX 77010 (713) 333-4500 (713) 333-4600 [fax] cjohnson@ethlaw.com www.ethlaw.com

More information

made by private organizations (called primary payers or primary plans). 4 This includes liability

made by private organizations (called primary payers or primary plans). 4 This includes liability passage of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act ( MSP ) 2 in 1980 provided for a redistribution of the primary payment burden. 3 Today, Medicare is a secondary payer to other available payment sources for

More information

Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION JAMES E. TOMLINSON and DARLENE TOMLINSON, his wife, v. Plaintiffs,

More information

USING MEDICARE SET-ASIDE ARRANGEMENTS IN THIRD PARTY LIABILITY CASES By: Thomas D. Begley, Jr.

USING MEDICARE SET-ASIDE ARRANGEMENTS IN THIRD PARTY LIABILITY CASES By: Thomas D. Begley, Jr. USING MEDICARE SET-ASIDE ARRANGEMENTS IN THIRD PARTY LIABILITY CASES By: Thomas D. Begley, Jr. This Special Report is brought to you by Begley Law Group. begleylawgroup.com This newsletter is not intended

More information

Medicare Dilemma ADMINISTRATION AND SETTLEMENT OF WORKERS COMPENSATION CLAIMS AND THE MEDICARE DILEMMA

Medicare Dilemma ADMINISTRATION AND SETTLEMENT OF WORKERS COMPENSATION CLAIMS AND THE MEDICARE DILEMMA Medicare Dilemma ADMINISTRATION AND SETTLEMENT OF WORKERS COMPENSATION CLAIMS AND THE MEDICARE DILEMMA I. Introduction Craig B. Nichols 2009 Hansen Dordell 3900 Northwoods Drive, Suite 250 St. Paul, MN

More information

Medicare Compliance in First- Party Claims

Medicare Compliance in First- Party Claims Insurance Law A Rock and a Hard Place By Erin Collins and Shannon Metcalf Medicare Compliance in First- Party Claims Insurers continue to face conflicting positions when complying with obligations under

More information

Subrogation and Liens: Basic Principles and Practical Considerations. Brandon E. Berg Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, L.L.P.

Subrogation and Liens: Basic Principles and Practical Considerations. Brandon E. Berg Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, L.L.P. Subrogation and Liens: Basic Principles and Practical Considerations Brandon E. Berg Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, L.L.P. Houston, Texas Texas Hospital Lien Statute Texas Property Code gives a hospital

More information

8/17/2012. Workers Compensation Institute. Learning Objectives. Agenda. 2012 Educational Conference

8/17/2012. Workers Compensation Institute. Learning Objectives. Agenda. 2012 Educational Conference Workers Compensation Institute 2012 Educational Conference Seeing the Forest through the Trees: MSA/LMSA Trends Celia Mendez, Esq. Cynthia Sage, Esq. Rafael Gonzalez Moreland & Mendez FCCI Insurance Gould

More information

VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY -- 2015 SESSION

VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY -- 2015 SESSION VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY -- 2015 SESSION CHAPTER 585 An Act to amend and reenact 38.2-2206 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Article 7 of Chapter 3 of Title 8.01 a

More information

Structured settlements currently play an important role in compliance with Medicare s Secondary Payer Act.

Structured settlements currently play an important role in compliance with Medicare s Secondary Payer Act. August 14, 2012 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Department of Health and Human Services ATTN: CMS-6047-ANPRM Room 445-G Hubert H. Humphrey Building 200 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20201

More information

MANDATORY INSURER REPORTING: A PRIMER FOR RESPONSIBLE REPORTING ENTITIES

MANDATORY INSURER REPORTING: A PRIMER FOR RESPONSIBLE REPORTING ENTITIES MANDATORY INSURER REPORTING: A PRIMER FOR RESPONSIBLE REPORTING ENTITIES INTRODUCTION Liability insurers, self-insured entities, and third party administrators should be aware of how Medicare s right to

More information

Lien Law: Recognizing and Management in the Personal Injury Case

Lien Law: Recognizing and Management in the Personal Injury Case Lien Law: Recognizing and Management in the Personal Injury Case I. INTRODUCTION At first blush, a personal injury plaintiff's procurement of proceeds either through settlement or adjudication may seem

More information

MEDICARE and MEDICAID UPDATE

MEDICARE and MEDICAID UPDATE MEDICARE and MEDICAID UPDATE State Bar of Texas 29 th Advanced Personal Injury Law Course Dallas, Texas - 7/10-12 San Antonio, Texas - 9/7-9 Houston, Texas - 9/28-30 Pi-Yi Mayo* 5223 Garth Road Baytown,

More information

Illinois Supreme Court Requires Plaintiff to Apportion Settlements Among Successive Tortfeasors

Illinois Supreme Court Requires Plaintiff to Apportion Settlements Among Successive Tortfeasors Illinois Supreme Court Requires Plaintiff to Apportion Settlements Among Successive Tortfeasors By: Joseph B. Carini III & Catherine H. Reiter Cole, Grasso, Fencl & Skinner, Ltd. Illinois Courts have long

More information

Maryland Workers Compensation Commission Introduction

Maryland Workers Compensation Commission Introduction Maryland Workers Compensation Commission Introduction Medicare Secondary Payer Act & Workers Compensation Settlement Process What this is not... This presentation is not a tutorial on how to create and

More information

IN BRIEF MEDICARE AND MEDICAID LIENS IN P.I. CASES

IN BRIEF MEDICARE AND MEDICAID LIENS IN P.I. CASES IN BRIEF Referred to in the June 2006 issue, page 2 PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY FUND MALPRACTICE PREVENTION EDUCATION FOR OREGON LAWYERS MEDICARE AND MEDICAID LIENS IN P.I. CASES When a client s injury is caused

More information

In 2007, Congress passed Section 111 to the Medicare, Medicaid

In 2007, Congress passed Section 111 to the Medicare, Medicaid SCHOLARLY ARTICLE What Every Attorney Must Know About Medicare Reporting and Reimbursement By Toni J. Ellington In 2007, Congress passed Section 111 to the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act (MMSEA).

More information

CLM 2016 Atlanta Conference May 19-20, 2016 in Atlanta, GA

CLM 2016 Atlanta Conference May 19-20, 2016 in Atlanta, GA CLM 2016 Atlanta Conference May 19-20, 2016 in Atlanta, GA Medicare Secondary Payer Compliance: The Critical Transition to the Commercial Repayment Center (CRC) What is Medicare? Medicare is an entitlement

More information

2:08-cv-12533-DPH-PJK Doc # 67 Filed 03/26/13 Pg 1 of 7 Pg ID 2147 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

2:08-cv-12533-DPH-PJK Doc # 67 Filed 03/26/13 Pg 1 of 7 Pg ID 2147 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION 2:08-cv-12533-DPH-PJK Doc # 67 Filed 03/26/13 Pg 1 of 7 Pg ID 2147 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, v. Plaintiff, MICHIGAN CATASTROPHIC

More information

Policy and Procedures for Recoupment & Coordination of Benefits: Workers Compensation Payment

Policy and Procedures for Recoupment & Coordination of Benefits: Workers Compensation Payment Policy and Procedures for Recoupment & Coordination of Benefits: Workers Compensation Payment Effective Date: September 1, 2013 Effective Date for Section 32 Agreements: October 1, 2013 Revised: December

More information

Subpart B Insurance Coverage That Limits Medicare Payment: General Provisions

Subpart B Insurance Coverage That Limits Medicare Payment: General Provisions Subpart B Insurance Coverage That Limits Medicare Payment: General Provisions 411.20 Basis and scope. (a) Statutory basis. (1) Section 1862(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act precludes Medicare payment for services

More information

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2015 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and

More information

Welcome to the Reportable Claims course.

Welcome to the Reportable Claims course. Welcome to the Reportable Claims course. Note: This module applies to Responsible Reporting Entities (RREs) that will be submitting Section 111 claim information via an electronic file submission as well

More information

PURCELL & WARDROPE NEWS Spring 2013

PURCELL & WARDROPE NEWS Spring 2013 PURCELL & WARDROPE NEWS Spring 2013 TRYING PRODUCT LIABILITY CASES IN ILLINOIS Our office obtained another defense verdict this week. This time it was in a product liability case in Cook County, Illinois,

More information

To Settle or Not to Settle? That Is the Medicare Question!

To Settle or Not to Settle? That Is the Medicare Question! To Settle or Not to Settle? That Is the Medicare Question! Jay Barry Harris Jennifer Tatum Root Fineman Krekstein & Harris, P.C. BNY Mellon Center 1735 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215)

More information

Reed Armstrong Quarterly

Reed Armstrong Quarterly Reed Armstrong Quarterly January 2009 http://www.reedarmstrong.com/default.asp Contributors: William B. Starnes II Tori L. Cox IN THIS ISSUE: Joint and Several Liability The Fault of Settled Tortfeasors

More information

Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services v. Ahlborn: Sea Change or Status Quo for Resolution of Medicaid Liens?

Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services v. Ahlborn: Sea Change or Status Quo for Resolution of Medicaid Liens? Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services v. Ahlborn: Sea Change or Status Quo for Resolution of Medicaid Liens? The Medicaid program, a public assistance system providing medical care for certain

More information

Medicare Issues in Workers Compensation Settlements PRESENTED BY: MICHELLE A. ALLAN, ESQ.

Medicare Issues in Workers Compensation Settlements PRESENTED BY: MICHELLE A. ALLAN, ESQ. Medicare Issues in Workers Compensation Settlements PRESENTED BY: MICHELLE A. ALLAN, ESQ. Medicare Basics Medicare is a health insurance program provided by the federal government for: People 65 years

More information

Understanding the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007

Understanding the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 Understanding the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 CNA believes we are more than your underwriting and risk management provider. Our ongoing customer service, technical support, and consultative

More information

Developments Concerning the Applicability of State Medicaid Lien Statutes

Developments Concerning the Applicability of State Medicaid Lien Statutes Developments Concerning the Applicability of State Medicaid Lien Statutes 2321 N. Loop Drive, Ste 200 Ames, Iowa 50010 www.calt.iastate.edu Updated February 15, 2014 - by Roger A. McEowen Overview Medicaid

More information

Case 8:13-cv-00295-EAK-TGW Document 145 Filed 02/12/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID 5551 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Case 8:13-cv-00295-EAK-TGW Document 145 Filed 02/12/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID 5551 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION Case 8:13-cv-00295-EAK-TGW Document 145 Filed 02/12/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID 5551 SUMMIT CONTRACTORS, INC., Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION v. CASE NO. 8:13-CV-295-T-17TGW

More information

Case 1:10-cv-02583-CCB Document 28 Filed 03/05/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Case 1:10-cv-02583-CCB Document 28 Filed 03/05/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Case 1:10-cv-02583-CCB Document 28 Filed 03/05/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND CRYSTAL WILLIAMS * * v. * Case No. CCB-10-2583 * TRAVCO INSURANCE CO. * ******

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE I. INTRODUCION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE I. INTRODUCION Case :-cv-00-rsm Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE CGI TECHNOLOGIES AND SOLUTIONS, INC., in its capacity as sponsor and fiduciary for CGI

More information

Liens: Workers' Compensation, Medicare, Medicaid, ERISA & DPW

Liens: Workers' Compensation, Medicare, Medicaid, ERISA & DPW Liens: Workers' Compensation, Medicare, Medicaid, ERISA & DPW Presented by: Daniel J. Siegel, Esquire Law Offices of Daniel J. Siegel, LLC Integrated Technology Services, LLC 66 West Eagle Road Suite 1

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 12-11755. D.C. Docket No. 8:10-cv-00733-JSM-TGW

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 12-11755. D.C. Docket No. 8:10-cv-00733-JSM-TGW Case: 12-11755 Date Filed: 01/22/2015 Page: 1 of 6 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 12-11755 D.C. Docket No. 8:10-cv-00733-JSM-TGW LETICIA MORALES, Individually

More information

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION THREE

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION THREE In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION THREE GERALD J. BAMBERGER, et al., ) No. ED92319 ) Appellants, ) ) Appeal from the Circuit Court vs. ) of St. Louis County ) 08SL-CC01435 CHARLES

More information

Table of Contents. 1. What should I do when the other driver s insurance company contacts me?... 1

Table of Contents. 1. What should I do when the other driver s insurance company contacts me?... 1 Table of Contents 1. What should I do when the other driver s insurance company contacts me?... 1 2. Who should be paying my medical bills from a car accident injury?... 2 3. What should I do after the

More information

NEW YORK NY GENERAL OBLIGATIONS LAW 5-1701 5-1709 TITLE 17 STRUCTURED SETTLEMENT PROTECTION ACT

NEW YORK NY GENERAL OBLIGATIONS LAW 5-1701 5-1709 TITLE 17 STRUCTURED SETTLEMENT PROTECTION ACT NEW YORK NY GENERAL OBLIGATIONS LAW 5-1701 5-1709 TITLE 17 STRUCTURED SETTLEMENT PROTECTION ACT 5-1701. Definitions. For purposes of this title: a. "Annuity issuer" means an insurer that has issued an

More information

MONTANA SELF INSURERS ASSOCIATION

MONTANA SELF INSURERS ASSOCIATION MONTANA SELF INSURERS ASSOCIATION Executive Director Bob Worthington Board of Directors Rick Clark Plum Creek Timber Co Tim Fitzpatrick MT Schools Group Donna Haeder NorthWestern Corp Marv Jordan MT Contractors

More information

PART III MEDICAID LIEN RECOVERY. 1) From the estate of the Medicaid recipient.

PART III MEDICAID LIEN RECOVERY. 1) From the estate of the Medicaid recipient. PART III MEDICAID LIEN RECOVERY 1. Basics: 1) For Medicaid benefits that are correctly paid, there are two major instances in which Medicaid may seek to impose and recover liens: 1) From the estate of

More information

Prepared by Whitney L. Teel, Esq.

Prepared by Whitney L. Teel, Esq. New Medicare Notice And Reporting Regulations: A Discussion On How To Settle Cases Without Exposing Clients To Penalties Under The Medicare Secondary Payer Act Prepared by Whitney L. Teel, Esq. I. Introduction

More information

IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT

IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT 2016 IL App (1st) 150810-U Nos. 1-15-0810, 1-15-0942 cons. Fourth Division June 30, 2016 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in

More information

Medicare Set-Aside Self-Administration

Medicare Set-Aside Self-Administration Medicare Set-Aside Self-Administration Why are claimants failing miserably? Since the establishment of Medicare s Coordination of Benefits Contractor in 2001, the Workers Compensation industry has come

More information

Before the recent passage of CRS 10-1-135, claims for subrogation

Before the recent passage of CRS 10-1-135, claims for subrogation Reproduced by permission. 2011 Colorado Bar Association, 40 The Colorado Lawyer 41 (February 2011). All rights reserved. TORT AND INSURANCE LAW CRS 10-1-135 and the Changing Face of Subrogation Claims

More information

1 of 1 DOCUMENT. ESTATE OF CLINTON MCDONALD PLAINTIFF v. INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA DEFENDANT CIVIL ACTION NO.

1 of 1 DOCUMENT. ESTATE OF CLINTON MCDONALD PLAINTIFF v. INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA DEFENDANT CIVIL ACTION NO. Page 1 1 of 1 DOCUMENT ESTATE OF CLINTON MCDONALD PLAINTIFF v. INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA DEFENDANT CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12-CV-577 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT

More information

Policy and Procedures for Recoupment & Coordination of Benefits: Workers Compensation Payment

Policy and Procedures for Recoupment & Coordination of Benefits: Workers Compensation Payment Policy and Procedures for Recoupment & Coordination of Benefits: Workers Compensation Payment Effective Date: September 1, 2013 I. Authority A. The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010

More information

NC MEDICAID ESTATE AND THIRD PARTY RECOVERY

NC MEDICAID ESTATE AND THIRD PARTY RECOVERY NC MEDICAID ESTATE AND THIRD PARTY RECOVERY Presentation to the North Carolina Chapter of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys September 18, 2014 Brian D. Rabinovitz Assistant Attorney General North

More information

INSTRUCTION LETTER TRONOX TORT CLAIMS TRUST INSTRUCTION LETTER (CATEGORY A) Dear Prospective Claimant or Claimant Counsel,

INSTRUCTION LETTER TRONOX TORT CLAIMS TRUST INSTRUCTION LETTER (CATEGORY A) Dear Prospective Claimant or Claimant Counsel, INSTRUCTION LETTER Dear Prospective Claimant or Claimant Counsel, The Tronox Incorporated Tort Claims Trust (the Trust ) has been established under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code to resolve all Tort

More information

settlement planning guide for plaintiffs

settlement planning guide for plaintiffs settlement planning guide for plaintiffs If you expect to receive a settlement as the result of a major injury or the death of a loved one, it is normal to feel overwhelmed. You may have questions about

More information

Medicare Update: Information to Help with the Darkness of Medicare Compliance. Peter H. Wayne IV, Esq.

Medicare Update: Information to Help with the Darkness of Medicare Compliance. Peter H. Wayne IV, Esq. FOR PUBLICATION IN THE 2012 WINTER EDITION OF THE ARKANSAS TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION S DOCKET Medicare Update: Information to Help with the Darkness of Medicare Compliance Peter H. Wayne IV, Esq. No matter

More information

FOR PROPERTY LOSS AND DAMAGE 1

FOR PROPERTY LOSS AND DAMAGE 1 13-20-801. Short title Colorado Revised Statutes Title 13; Article 20; Part 8: CONSTRUCTION DEFECT ACTIONS FOR PROPERTY LOSS AND DAMAGE 1 This part 8 shall be known and may be cited as the Construction

More information

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and to add Chapter 6 (commencing with

More information

STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS

STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS NORTH CAROLINA TRIAL JUDGES BENCH BOOK, SUPERIOR COURT, VOL. 2 (Civil), Structured Settlements, at pp. 4-7 (3d ed.) (Institute of Government 1999) A. THE APPROVAL HEARING 1. Plaintiff

More information

MEDICARE AND WORKERS= COMPENSATION CLAIMS WHO=S ON FIRST? Michael E. Rusin. January, 2002

MEDICARE AND WORKERS= COMPENSATION CLAIMS WHO=S ON FIRST? Michael E. Rusin. January, 2002 MEDICARE AND WORKERS= COMPENSATION CLAIMS WHO=S ON FIRST? Michael E. Rusin January, 2002 Michael E. Rusin Rusin Maciorowski & Friedman, Ltd. 10 South Riverside Plaza, Suite 1530 Chicago, IL 60606 (312)

More information

PART 15--ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS UNDER FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

PART 15--ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS UNDER FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT Note: This document contains FAR Part 15 including Amendment 15-4 published in the Federal Register on September 4, 1997. PART 15--ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS UNDER FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT Subpart A--General

More information

1 Nicole Miklos, Note: Giving an inch, then taking a mile: How the government s unrestricted recovery of conditional

1 Nicole Miklos, Note: Giving an inch, then taking a mile: How the government s unrestricted recovery of conditional The Effect of Medicare Set-Asides on Settling Jones Act Personal Injury Cases Lawrence R. DeMarcay, III Partner, Fowler Rodriguez Valdes-Fauli (Published and Presented on December 29, 2011- Tulane University

More information

Construction Defect Action Reform Act

Construction Defect Action Reform Act COLORADO REVISED STATUTES Title 13. Courts and Court Procedure Damages Regulation of Actions and Proceedings Article 20. Actions Part 8. Construction Defect Actions for Property Loss and Damage Construction

More information

MEDICAL BENEFITS CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUE

MEDICAL BENEFITS CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUE MEDICAL BENEFITS CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUE Complete this form if you are a MEDICAL BENEFITS SETTLEMENT CLASS MEMBER seeking to exercise a BACK END LITIGATION OPTION. In addition to

More information

Medicare in Personal Injury Claim Settlements: Complying with Reporting Requirements and Satisfying Liens

Medicare in Personal Injury Claim Settlements: Complying with Reporting Requirements and Satisfying Liens Presenting a 90-Minute Encore Presentation of the Teleconference with Live, Interactive Q&A Medicare in Personal Injury Claim Settlements: Complying with Reporting Requirements and Satisfying Liens TUESDAY,

More information

Workers Compensation & Medicare Set-Asides"

Workers Compensation & Medicare Set-Asides Workers Compensation & Medicare Set-Asides" Presented by: Betty Gregware, CSSC Mutual of Omaha & Toni Warbington, CSSC EPS Settlements Group W/C vs. Tortfeasor Liability" No provision to bring suit against

More information

Frank E. Jenkins, III JENKINS & BOWEN, P.C. 15 South Public Square Cartersville, Georgia 30120 (770) 387-1373

Frank E. Jenkins, III JENKINS & BOWEN, P.C. 15 South Public Square Cartersville, Georgia 30120 (770) 387-1373 Frank E. Jenkins, III JENKINS & BOWEN, P.C. 15 South Public Square Cartersville, Georgia 30120 (770) 387-1373 Wallace Miller, III WALLACE MILLER, III, LLC 509 Forest Hills Road Macon, Georgia 30209 (478)

More information

Workers Compensation: Commutation of Future Benefits

Workers Compensation: Commutation of Future Benefits July 23, 2001 To: From: SUBJECT: All Associate Regional Administrators Attention: Division of Medicare Deputy Director Purchasing Policy Group Center for Medicare Management Workers Compensation: Commutation

More information

Workers Compensation Mandatory Attorney Fees

Workers Compensation Mandatory Attorney Fees STATE OF NEW JERSEY NEW JERSEY LAW REVISION COMMISSION Draft Tentative Report Relating to November 7, 2011 This draft tentative report is distributed to advise interested persons of the Commission's tentative

More information

California Health and Safety Code. Chapter 2.5 of Division 107

California Health and Safety Code. Chapter 2.5 of Division 107 California Health and Safety Code Chapter 2.5 of Division 107 AB 1503 (Chapter 445, Statutes of 2010) amended Hospital Fair Pricing Policies established by AB 774 (Statutes of 2006) and added Emergency

More information

Illinois Official Reports

Illinois Official Reports Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Acuity v. Decker, 2015 IL App (2d) 150192 Appellate Court Caption ACUITY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DONALD DECKER, Defendant- Appellee (Groot Industries, Inc., Defendant).

More information

United States Workers Compensation/Indemnification Overview

United States Workers Compensation/Indemnification Overview United States Workers Compensation/Indemnification Overview January 18, 2012 Jill Kirila jill.kirila@squiresanders.com Kevin Hess kevin.hess@squiresanders.com 36 Offices in 17 Countries Workers Compensation

More information

HARVEY KRUSE, P.C. BAD FAITH

HARVEY KRUSE, P.C. BAD FAITH HARVEY KRUSE, P.C. BAD FAITH Prepared By: Michael F. Schmidt P25213 HARVEY KRUSE, P.C. 1050 Wilshire Drive, Suite 320 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 649-7800 Fax (248) 649-2316 A. INTRODUCTION Subject to specific

More information

Frank E. Jenkins, III JENKINS & BOWEN, P.C. 15 South Public Square Cartersville, Georgia 30120 (770) 387-1373

Frank E. Jenkins, III JENKINS & BOWEN, P.C. 15 South Public Square Cartersville, Georgia 30120 (770) 387-1373 Frank E. Jenkins, III JENKINS & BOWEN, P.C. 15 South Public Square Cartersville, Georgia 30120 (770) 387-1373 Wallace Miller, III WALLACE MILLER, III, LLC 509 Forest Hills Road Macon, Georgia 30209 (478)

More information

THE STATE OF FLORIDA...

THE STATE OF FLORIDA... TABLE OF CONTENTS I. THE STATE OF FLORIDA... 2 A. FREQUENTLY CITED FLORIDA STATUTES... 2 1. General Considerations in Insurance Claim Management... 2 2. Insurance Fraud... 5 3. Automobile Insurance...

More information

Stipulated Settlements Topics to Consider. David Kay Settlement Division Director, State Board of Worker s Compensation Atlanta, Georgia

Stipulated Settlements Topics to Consider. David Kay Settlement Division Director, State Board of Worker s Compensation Atlanta, Georgia Stipulated Settlements Topics to Consider David Kay Settlement Division Director, State Board of Worker s Compensation Atlanta, Georgia. 1 Topics to Consider when Drafting a Stipulated Settlement Stipulated

More information

www.cms.hhs.gov/mandatoryinsrep/01_overview.asp INTRODUCTION October 1, 2010.

www.cms.hhs.gov/mandatoryinsrep/01_overview.asp INTRODUCTION October 1, 2010. 1. INTRODUCTION Recent changes in federal law represent a sea change in the consideration that must be given by defendants to the interests of Medicare. Up until March, 2009, Medicare, when attempting

More information

NC WORKERS COMPENSATION: BASIC INFORMATION FOR MEDICAL PROVIDERS

NC WORKERS COMPENSATION: BASIC INFORMATION FOR MEDICAL PROVIDERS NC WORKERS COMPENSATION: BASIC INFORMATION FOR MEDICAL PROVIDERS CURRENT AS OF APRIL 1, 2010 I. INFORMATION SOURCES Where is information available for medical providers treating patients with injuries/conditions

More information

Solutions to New Medicare Compliance Rules: A Presentation to the National Council of Self-Insurers. National Coverage

Solutions to New Medicare Compliance Rules: A Presentation to the National Council of Self-Insurers. National Coverage Solutions to New Medicare Compliance Rules: A Presentation to the National Council of Self-Insurers National Coverage Medicare Crisis Medicare is now paying out more than it takes in. Healthcare costs

More information

CONTINGENCY FEE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN ATTORNEY AND CLIENT

CONTINGENCY FEE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN ATTORNEY AND CLIENT CONTINGENCY FEE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN ATTORNEY AND CLIENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of this Day of, 2009 by and between JOSEPH L. KASHI, Attorney at Law, hereinafter called "Attorney" and,

More information

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Safe Auto Insurance Company, : Appellant : : v. : No. 2247 C.D. 2004 : Argued: February 28, 2005 School District of Philadelphia, : Pride Coleman and Helena Coleman

More information

CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION SERVICES AGREEMENT

CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION SERVICES AGREEMENT Attachment D.13 CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION SERVICES AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between SANTA BARBARA SCHOOL DISTRICTS hereinafter referred to as "DISTRICT", and KEENAN & ASSOCIATES,

More information

Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia Policy Statement 1105.1 Effective date: 12/14/2000 Page 2

Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia Policy Statement 1105.1 Effective date: 12/14/2000 Page 2 Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia Page 2 III. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The General Counsel is delegated authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2672 to consider, ascertain,

More information

THE THREAT OF BAD FAITH LITIGATION ETHICAL HANDLING OF CLAIMS AND GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT PRACTICES. By Craig R. White

THE THREAT OF BAD FAITH LITIGATION ETHICAL HANDLING OF CLAIMS AND GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT PRACTICES. By Craig R. White THE THREAT OF BAD FAITH LITIGATION ETHICAL HANDLING OF CLAIMS AND GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT PRACTICES By Craig R. White SKEDSVOLD & WHITE, LLC. 1050 Crown Pointe Parkway Suite 710 Atlanta, Georgia 30338 (770)

More information

Homeowner's insurance usually covers the following when they are due to accident or specific

Homeowner's insurance usually covers the following when they are due to accident or specific Insurance TYPES OF POLICIES There are as many types of insurance policies as there are risks. During a disaster people may draw upon health, property and casualty and life insurance. These types of policies

More information

Case 2:09-cv-00532-JPH Document 23 Filed 02/02/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:09-cv-00532-JPH Document 23 Filed 02/02/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 2:09-cv-00532-JPH Document 23 Filed 02/02/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL WALKER : CIVIL ACTION : v. : : NO. 09-532 BIG BURGER RESTAURANTS,

More information

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION LOUISE FOSTER Administrator of the : AUGUST TERM 2010 Estate of GEORGE FOSTER : and BARBARA DILL : vs.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 14-11987 Non-Argument Calendar. Docket No. 1:13-cv-02128-WSD.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 14-11987 Non-Argument Calendar. Docket No. 1:13-cv-02128-WSD. Case: 14-11987 Date Filed: 10/21/2014 Page: 1 of 11 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 14-11987 Non-Argument Calendar Docket No. 1:13-cv-02128-WSD PIEDMONT OFFICE

More information

2013 IL App (3d) 120130-U. Order filed September 23, 2013 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2013

2013 IL App (3d) 120130-U. Order filed September 23, 2013 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2013 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1). 2013 IL App (3d) 120130-U Order

More information