Disclaimer
This publication is designed to provide general information on pertinent legal topics. The statements made are provided for educational purposes only. They do not constitute legal or financial advice nor do they necessarily reflect the views of Holland & Hart LLP or any of its attorneys other than the author. This publication is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship between you and Holland & Hart LLP. Substantive changes in the law subsequent to the date of this publication might affect the analysis or commentary. Similarly, the analysis may differ depending on the jurisdiction or circumstances. If you have specific questions as to the application of the law to your activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.
Privacy Policy
View our privacy policy.
HIPAA Tips: Information for Covered Entities and Employers
/in HIPAABy Kristy M. Kimball and Lisa Carlson
What’s the Issue?
Covered entities, such as hospitals and other healthcare providers, may be asked by unrelated third-parties for information relating to a patient’s diagnosis or presumed diagnosis of COVID-19.
The information below outlines how the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) applies to health information obtained or maintained by those subject to HIPAA (e.g., covered entities or business associates of covered entities), but does not cover state-specific privacy laws or employment-specific confidentiality laws. For example, the ADA, FMLA, and workers compensation laws all have confidentiality aspects that will impact employers. Read more
Fraud and Abuse in Private Payor Situations
/in Fraud and AbuseBy Kim Stanger
Healthcare attorneys and their clients are generally aware of and take appropriate steps to avoid the severe penalties that may follow fraud and abuse of government payor programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. They may be less attuned to their potential liability in private payor situations and, consequently, more cavalier when considering mistakes, misconduct, and potential repayments to private payors, including patients, residents, insurers, or other third parties. Red flag situations may include, e.g., waiving copays or deductibles; providing patient or resident discounts or other inducements to receive services, especially for out-of-network patients; kickbacks or similar arrangements to induce referrals; billing and coding errors; false claims; billing for medically unnecessary services; billing for services that were provided by unlicensed or uncredentialed providers or misrepresenting the provider of services; failing to comply with coordination of benefits or secondary payor rules; double payments; claims that lack sufficient documentation; or claims for substandard care. Whether due to business concerns or regulatory mandates, private payors seem to be increasingly active in monitoring and responding to potential provider fraud or abuse. This memo will summarize some of the statutory, contractual, and common law bases for private payor enforcement. Read more
Beware Laws Affecting Healthcare Transactions
/in Anti-Kickback, Fraud and Abuse, HIPAA, StarkBy Kim Stanger
Republished with permission, this article originally appeared in the online edition of Idaho State Bar’s The Advocate on March 11, 2020.
Attorneys risk substantial fines, malpractice claims, and even jail time for violating any of several laws implicated in even simple healthcare transactions. Federal and state healthcare laws potentially affect any financial transaction involving healthcare providers, including employment or service contracts, group compensation structures, investment interests and joint ventures, leases for space or equipment, marketing programs, and patient billing practices. Failure to comply may result in significant fines and penalties for clients as well as malpractice claims—or worse—against their lawyers. This article describes several statutes and regulations that can be traps for the unwary in healthcare transactions. Read more
Update on Corporate Practice of Medicine Under Idaho Law
/in Idaho Healthcare LawBy Gabriel (Gabe) Hamilton
Republished with permission, this article originally appeared in the online edition of Idaho State Bar’s The Advocate on March 11, 2020.
In 2016, the Idaho Board of Medicine abandoned its position that Idaho law prohibits physicians from being employed by non-physicians. The Board’s new position removes obstacles to non-physician investments in medical practices and other transactions that previously were prohibited by the Board’s enforcement of an antiquated rule known as the corporate practice of medicine doctrine (“COPM”). Read more
Minors’ Ability to Consent to Medical Treatment Under Utah Law
/in Consent, Healthcare LawBy Kristy M. Kimball
Medical providers are sometimes faced with the difficult scenario of a minor (under 18 years of age) requesting medical or mental health treatment without a parent’s or legal guardian’s consent. This situation often arises in the context of sexually active minors who wish to obtain contraceptives available only through a medical provider (e.g., prescription birth control, IUD, etc.). When facing such scenarios, Utah providers need to be aware of relevant laws and carefully consider other implications. Read more