Disciplined in Sophisticated Defense and Insurance Litigation

June 04, 2015 | Blog Post| Southern District of Florida Awards Duplicate Medicare Lien Payment

In a puzzling decision on the resolution of Medicare liens entered on March 16, 2015, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida found that a private insurer, Humana Medical Plan, which provided Medicare Advantage Medicare benefits, had a private right of action to pursue reimbursement directly from a primary payer, Western Heritage Insurance Company, and awarded Humana Medical Plan double the amount Western Heritage previously paid to the underlying Plaintiff to settle her claimed medical expenses.   The case is Humana Medical Plan, Inc. v. Western Heritage Insurance Co, 2015 WL 1191208 (S.D. Fla. March 16, 2015).

The “double damages,” which factually resulted in Western Heritage paying triple the amount of the Medicare lien, were awarded based on the fact that the Medicare lien was not paid within 60 days of a primary payment as provided by 42 C.F.R. § 411.24(h), despite the fact that the underlying Plaintiff was actively litigating her entitlement to a reduction of the lien based on her procurement costs in a separate state court proceeding, attested in her settlement agreement that there were no outstanding Medicare liens, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a letter stating that it had no record of processing Medicare claims on behalf of the underlying Plaintiff.  Western Heritage became aware of the alleged lien right before it tendered the settlement payment and included Humana on the settlement check, but was ordered by a state court judge to issue the full settlement check without including any lien holder.  The state court judge ordered Plaintiff’s counsel to hold sufficient funds in trust to resolve all medical liens.   The federal order was issued despite the fact that Plaintiff previously obtained a reduction of Humana’s lien amount in the state court declaratory action based on the amount of her recovery and procurement costs, which was appealed by Humana.  That appeal remains pending.

The federal court noted that the primary payer must reimburse the MAO Medicare Advantage benefits provider even though it has already reimbursed the beneficiary or other party, and the obligation to pay within 60 days applies whether the third-party payment comes from a settlement or stipulation.   The federal court also noted that Humana previously sent the underlying Plaintiff an Organization Determination Letter in 2010 alerting her to the amount Humana was owed, and she failed to challenge that determination through the administrative procedures set up to do so, thus disallowing any further judicial scrutiny of that claim amount.

We will monitor appellate decisions in both cases, and provide related updates.  In the interim, we recommend that the source of payment of medical expense payments be thoroughly investigated prior to settlement, and that settlement agreements require direct payment of Medicare liens by the settling entity’s carrier within 60 days of any settlement payments.

Ryan Garrett

Ryan is a partner in the firm’s Tallahassee office focusing his practice on third party liability defense, construction and professional liability matters.

October 29, 2019 Blog PostSeeing May Soon be Believing: The Possible Expansion of Summary Judgment in Florida with Respect to Dash Camera Footage

Many transportation companies use dash cameras for purposes of defending against actions for liability.  However, recently in Lopez v. Wilsonart, LLC, 275 So. 3d 831 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)...

Read More »
July 19, 2019 Blog PostPHENOMENON OR PANDEMIC: PONDERING THE POTENTIAL LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE E-SCOOTER CRAZE

On July 12, 2019, YouTube celebrity Emily Hartridge died from injuries she sustained in a collision between an electric scooter (“e-scooter”) she was riding and a truck in London, England. This high profile incident helps bring to light the legal phenomenon being created by the e-scooter rental industry...

Read More »
May 29, 2019 Blog PostThe Final Word? The Florida Supreme Court Adopts the Daubert Standard for Evidence

Prior to 1993, federal and state courts used the standard enunciated in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), to determine whether scientific evidence should be admitted at a trial.  The Frye standard requires the offeror of the evidence to establish that the expert opinion is based on principles and testing procedures that are generally accepted by the scientific community.  The standard only applies to new and novel scientific evidence.

Read More »
February 27, 2017 Blog PostNEW MEDICARE CONDITIONAL PAYMENT CASE: FEDERAL COURT REQUIRES CMS TO PERFORM SURGERY ON ITS PRIMARY PLAN REIMBUSEMENT DEMANDS

Doctors often treat Medicare beneficiaries for accident related injuries (for which a “primary” auto or workers’ compensation carrier must reimburse Medicare) and unrelated maladies at the same visit. Billing for the visit cites multiple diagnosis codes, but a single charge for treatment of both an accident related back injury and unrelated hypertension, or gout for example.

Read More »
December 06, 2016 Blog PostTRIAL COURT SLIPS AND FALLS IN GRANTING MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL

On October 21, 2016, Florida’s Second DCA issued a decision in a slip-and-fall case against Wal-Mart that found the trial court erred when it set aside the jury verdict and granted Plaintiff’s motion for new trial on the basis that Wal-Mart’s failure to follow its own safety policy clearly demonstrated a finding of negligence.

Read More »
November 02, 2015 Blog PostWHAT THE SECOND DISTRICT GIVETH, THE SUPREME COURT TAKETH AWAY

On October 15, 2015, the Supreme Court of Florida quashed a Second District decision that ruled evidence of Medicare benefits was admissible under an exception to the collateral source rule.

Read More »
October 22, 2015 Blog PostFlorida's 4th DCA Enforces Limit on Expert Discovery

Inconsistencies between the defense expert’s interrogatory answers and his deposition testimony regarding the percentage of income the doctor derived from working as an expert witness, and the number of times he testified for plaintiffs versus defendants.

Read More »
July 24, 2014 Blog PostSports Laws Focusing More and More on Youth Sports

Youth sports have become a year-round, multi-million dollar industry. From travel teams, to club ball, to off-season workouts, the concept of youth sports has changed dramatically from a fun day at the park to a highly competitive atmosphere, where specialization and focus on one particular sport begins at an earlier and earlier age. As a result of the increase in the popularity and appetite for competition among children, the law has also begun to change.

Read More »

Key Points