Assisted clients on how to respond to growing demands to make their companies and products more sustainable, a goal increasingly being adopted by companies in the health care industry
Behavioral Health Care Law
Clark Hill’s Behavioral Health Care group has been and continues to be a leader in educating and consulting with behavioral health care providers to find money in the Affordable Care Act. We prepare and deliver presentations to behavioral health care providers on how parity works and what compliance with the privacy obligations of 42 C.F.R. Part 2 means. Our behavioral health provider clients get paid on claims, stay out of licensing trouble, and buy into effective and affordable compliance programs. Our Behavioral Health practice group is involved with cutting edge issues of developing an insurable and affordable behavioral health-oriented health information exchange, creating programs that integrate primary medical care with behavioral health, implementing new Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) regulations. We ensure that behavioral health gets a seat at the table of national health care reform.
Our clients have the luxury of choosing from many accomplished law firms that deliver high quality and cost-effective legal services. What distinguishes our Behavioral Health Care team, however, are intangible factors – factors that benefit our clients. For example, our attorneys enjoy their work. We enjoy the challenge of meeting and exceeding an unbalanced burden of proof in the representation of the behavioral health care clients. In civil litigation, the recognized burden of proof is a “preponderance of the evidence” (more than 50 percent). However, due to negative stigma and hindsight bias to be successful in civil litigation, the burden of proof, in reality, is “clear and convincing.” These challenges, generated through the behavioral health delivery system, create excitement and trigger the talents and creativity of our Behavioral Health practice group.
The ultimate goal of each member of the Behavioral Health practice group is to become more than just an attorney for our clients. Our goal is to become a trusted counselor and advisor for all aspects of our clients’ work.
Hands-On Experience Translates into Expertise
Our Behavioral Health practice group represents behavioral health care providers in numerous states related to procurement, administrative law, contract disputes, licensing, claims disputes, Medicaid reimbursement matters, government regulatory compliance, malpractice defense, CMS sanctions, fraud and abuse, qui tam actions, healthcare financing, creation and operation of managed care organizations, labor and employment law services, corporate compliance program development, education, and maintenance. We are familiar with government-managed care contracts and the issues affecting all providers generated through ongoing governmental regulation.
Our Behavioral Health practice group participates in the policy development groups that focus on creating methodologies to integrate the delivery of medical and behavioral health care. You will find that the behavioral health care attorneys supply value-added services to clients because their experience in the behavioral health care arena has been hands-on.
Commented on EPA rulemaking s for a trade association representing a segment of in the health care industry
Tracks regulatory developments for health care industry clients to provide early warning of significant new regulations or risks to a company's business, particularly concerning issues relating to FIFRA compliance for chemicals which claim to reduce Ebola, norovirus, and other viruses that are unlikely to have been explicitly testing in the original pesticide registration process
Advised on methods of responding to regulatory agency and press concerns about the presence of "toxic" chemicals in products used by the health care industry
With assistance from Kristi Gauthier, Ed Hammond, Peter Domas and Bishop Bartoni, Kevin Hendrick and Nicole Tersigni successfully defended an insurance priority dispute, resulting in an extremely favorable judgment for firm client, United States Steel Corporation’s ERISA-governed Retiree Benefits Plan. U. S. Steel Retirement Plan was joined as a third-party defendant in a pending dispute by a No-Fault Automobile Insurance carrier, which had been sued by a healthcare service provider for unpaid patient attendant care fees. The No-Fault Carrier claimed that the obligation to pay for these services under Michigan No-Fault law fell to U. S. Steel Retirement Plan, which covered the patient (who was a former U. S. Steel employee). Ed, Bishop, Kristi and Peter lent their expertise to Kevin and Nicole in interpreting alleged conflicting insurance priority provisions and explanations of benefits. Kevin and Nicole crafted a legal argument that ultimately led to summary disposition in favor of U.S. Steel Plan, and against the No-Fault carrier, saving U.S. Steel Plan from payment of the healthcare fees, and also reimbursing U.S. Steel Plan for benefits it had earlier paid by mistake, out of priority. As the No-Fault carrier had rejected the Case Evaluation award prior to the filing of cross motions for summary disposition, it also appears that attorney fees are recoverable for our client. Kristi and Ed on Employee Benefit law, Bishop on Michigan No-Fault law, and Pete on Health Care issues, proved to be unbeatable resources.
Managed Care and Health Care Industry Litigation - Practiced before state and federal agencies and the courts relating to Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement issues.
Health Care Industry Litigation - Participated and litigated in several federal bankruptcy and state court receivership proceedings of hospitals.
Antitrust and Trade Regulation - Lead Counsel in an antitrust case which successfully put an end to a decade’s long boycott against one of the largest dental insurers in the country.
Managed Care and Health Care Industry Litigation - Counseled clients and litigated third party reimbursement and accounting for reimbursement issues.
Antitrust and Trade Regulation - Reported antitrust decisions include the following: Pennsylvania Dental Association v. Medical Service Association of Pennsylvania, 815 F.2d 270 (3d Cir. 1987), rev’g, 632 F.Supp. 653 (M.D. Pa. 1986), cert denied, 484 U.S. 851 (1987); Pennsylvania Dental Association v. Medical Service Association of Pennsylvania, 745 F.2d 248 (3d Cir. 1984), aff’g, 574 F.Supp. 457 (M.D. Pa. 1983), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1060 (1985).
Antitrust and Trade Regulation - Antitrust litigation experience includes representing clients in the insurance, health care, soft drink, construction, manufacturing, hardware and building materials industries.
Managed Care and Health Care Industry Litigation - Litigated provider participation status under the Medicare program.
Managed Care and Health Care Industry Litigation - Litigated issues related to institutional providers’ Medicaid cost reports.
Counsel to mid-market health care companies including cancer treatment centers, dialysis centers, sleep labs, and ambulatory surgery centers providing lead counsel and coordinating legal counsel on a wide array of matters including corporate matters, operations, acquisition and divestiture transactions, joint venture projects, corporate governance, business planning and financial transactions, and legal compliance.
Represent healthcare insurers, third party administrators, managed care organizations and others in contractual, business and other disputes. Representation includes counseling clients and litigating issues regarding payments, accounting for payments, third party administration and self-insured health plan issues, fraud claims, among others