Disciplined in Sophisticated Defense and Insurance Litigation

February 27, 2017 | Blog Post| NEW 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.

This may be efficient for the doctor and patient, but it’s been a pain in the neck for primary plans, because until now CMS has demanded reimbursement for the total charge…gout and all.  This can make primary payors’ blood boil. They get stuck with both related and unrelated charges, paying for high blood pressure treatment in addition to the back injury. 

But some relief may be at hand. Last month a California Federal District Judge required CMS to take a scalpel to such single medical expense charges with multiple diagnosis codes. In CIGA v Burwell 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1681, (an astute and well-reasoned opinion) Judge Wright noted that primary plans are only required to reimburse CMS for an “item or [individual] service” for which the primary plan bears responsibility. In light of this itemized, statutory directive, he ordered CMS to slice out unrelated charges before demanding reimbursement from primary plans.

CMS protested: How are we supposed to figure out how much of a single charge is attributable to the related injury as opposed to other maladies? The Judge was unsympathetic: CMS that’s your problem – it may be more difficult than your current procedure, but it must be done.

This is a great decision for workers’ compensation carriers or bodily injury carriers (primary plans) required to reimburse Medicare. It could save plans big money, while also being fair to all. Let’s hope this type of common sense spreads….   

William P. Schoel

A Partner at Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP in Tampa, FL. William practices in our Casualty Defense Litigation, Construction, Employment Law, and Product Liability.

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 »
June 04, 2015 Blog PostSouthern District of Florida Awards Duplicate Medicare Lien Payment

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.

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
Author Practice Area CASE TYPE
  • Casualty Defense