PPAC and Its Possible Effects on Medical Expense Tort Damages
In last month's issue, we began a discussion of how the mandatory health insurance requirement of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPAC) could work to reduce the amount of tort damages recoverable for medical expenses. We continue herein.
Features
Hospital-Acquired Infections Are on the Rise
On Oct. 16, 2007, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in Atlanta, issued a press release stating that, for the first time, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus auereus (MRSA) was killing more people than AIDS.
Medicare Set-Asides in Med-Mal and Personal Injury Litigation
An issue that arises with increasing frequency is whether, and to what extent, funds should be allocated from a settlement to provide for future medical costs that Medicare would otherwise be required to pay.
mHealth: Boon or Bane?
Until issues of privacy and security can be addressed, it would be best for physicians to limit their use of mHealth to nonconfidential communications. The risks currently outweigh the benefits.
Features
Federal Health Care Law May Reduce or Eliminate Future Medical Expense Tort Damages
The mandatory health insurance requirement of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPAC) should significantly reduce the amount of tort damages recoverable for medical expenses. Here's how.
Top Tips: Reducing the Risks and Managing the Consequences of Radiation Injury
Radiology professionals and firms that manufacture radiology equipment must anticipate the possibilities of tort claims, and plan ahead to limit the damage they can cause.
Features
<B><I>BREAKING NEWS:</b></i> <b>Eleventh Circuit Strikes Down Individual Mandate</b>
The Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Aug. 12 gave a partial victory to challengers of the 2010 federal health care overhaul, finding unconstitutional the part of the law that requires individuals to obtain health insurance but upholding the rest of the statute.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Second Circuit Reinforces Bankruptcy Code Settlement Payment Safe HarborThe Second Circuit affirmed the lower courts' judgment that a "transfer made … in connection with a securities contract … by a qualifying financial institution" was entitled "to the protection of ... §546 (e)'s safe harbor ...."Read More ›
- The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance ProgramsThe parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.Read More ›
- The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year LaterThe DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.Read More ›
- Questions Every Law Firm Business Development Leader Should Be AskingIn a legal marketplace transformed by technology, heightened client expectations, and fierce competition, law firm leaders must approach strategy with rigor and clarity. The following questions, accompanied by relevant statistics and explanations, offer a focused guide for uncovering opportunity and driving sustainable growth.Read More ›
- Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar InvestigationsThis article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.Read More ›
