ERISA update: the Supreme Court Texas decision and other recent developments.

نویسنده

  • Patricia A Butler
چکیده

This issue brief is part of a continuing series of policy papers published by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's State Coverage Initiatives program, housed at AcademyHealth, and the National Academy for State Health Policy on the state health policy implications of ERISA's preemption clause.1 The purpose of the brief is to explore the U.S. Supreme Court's June 2004 decision that ERISA preempts the Texas HMO liability law and its effects on other state health plan liability laws. The brief also examines implications of ERISA preemption for state health insurance regulation, "pay or play" health coverage laws, and premium assistance programs.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Will the Supreme Court finally eliminate ERISA preemption?

David Trueman's article reviews the history of ERISA preemption by analyzing seminal Supreme Court cases and predicts the future of ERISA preemption in his analysis of recent federal case law. Traditionally, the ability to hold a managed care entity responsible for its actions has been hampered by a strict interpretation of the preemption clauses of ERISA but as the Supreme Court's jurisprudenc...

متن کامل

The Supreme Court limits lawsuits against managed care organizations.

In Aetna Health Inc. v. Davila, the United States Supreme Court revisited the question of whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) precludes state lawsuits against ERISA plans. The Court held that ERISA preempts damage actions brought against managed care organizations under the Texas Health Care Liability Act because ERISA itself provides the exclusive remedy for challenging...

متن کامل

Recent developments in health insurance, life insurance, and disability insurance case law.

This survey reviews significant state and federal court decisions from 2006 and 2007 involving health, life, and disability insurance. Also reviewed is a June 2008 Supreme Court decision in the disability insurance realm, affirming that a conflict of interest exists when an ERISA plan sponsor or insurer fulfills the dual role of determining plan benefits and paying those benefits but noting tha...

متن کامل

The states, Congress, or the courts: who will be first to reform ERISA remedies?

Curtis Rooney's article reviews the ERISA law and it relationship to managed care. The piece continues with a review of the relevant preremption provisions and a extentivsive discussion of related U.S. Supreme Court decisions. The author discusses malpractice and design liabilities. The article concludes with a discussion of reform initiatives directed toward the ERISA preemption and damage pro...

متن کامل

Independent medical review: expanding legal remedies to achieve managed care accountability.

Author Leatrice Berman-Sandler reports on independent medical review (IMR), a state-based statutory remedy used to resolve disputes over coverage between patients and their health plans. Ms. Berman-Sandler explores the connection between ERISA preemption and IMR, and opines that in light of recent Supreme Court decisions, the stage has been set for expansion of IMR. Accordingly, Ms. Berman-Sand...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • State Coverage Initiatives issue brief : a national initiative of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

دوره 5 2  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2004