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.
Utah Care-Review Privilege
/in Liability & Risk Managementby Cory Talbot
Utah adopted a care-review privilege “to improve medical care by allowing health-care personnel to reduce morbidity or mortality and to provide information to evaluate and improve hospital and health care.”1 In January, the Utah Court of Appeals gave some helpful guidance about the application of this privilege in Vered v. Tooele Hospital Corporation.2
The Care-Review Privilege Generally
Before discussing the Vered case, we will go over a number of general background issues regarding the scope and application of the care-review privilege. Read more
Want to Hire an Employee Subject to a Noncompete Agreement?
/in Contracts & Transactions, Employmentby Nicole Snyder
Republished with permission from Idaho Medical Group Management Association (MGMA). Original article appeared in Idaho MGMA’s May 2018 e-newsletter.
As the healthcare industry grows, and at a time when unemployment is low, it can be very frustrating to find potential employee candidates who are bound by noncompete agreements with current or former employers.
Medical practices shouldn’t be too quick to throw in the towel before rejecting candidates on the basis of having a noncompete agreement. Here are some pointers to help with the hiring process in these situations: Read more
IMGMA Q/A: Service Animals
/in ADAby Rob Low
Republished with permission from Idaho Medical Group Management Association (MGMA). Original article appeared in Idaho MGMA’s April 2018 e-newsletter.
Question: What are “Service Animals”, and to what extent (i) must they be allowed on health care facility premises, and (ii) can they be refused or removed from premises?
Answer: Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), “Service Animals” are defined as dogs that are individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. This means the dog must be trained to take a specific action when needed to assist the person with a disability (e.g., a dog which is trained to guide a blind person, alert a deaf person, pull a wheelchair, alert a person with diabetes that his or her blood sugar is too high or too low). The ADA also recognizes that, in some instances, a person with a disability may use a miniature horse that has been trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities as a service animal. Under the ADA, service animals must be harnessed, leashed, or tethered, unless these devices interfere with the service animal’s work or the individual’s disability prevents using these devices. However, the ADA does not require service animals to wear a vest, ID tag, or specific harness. Read more
Minimizing Liability For Business Associate Misconduct
/in HIPAABy Kim Stanger
Republished with permission from AHLA’s Physicians and Hospitals Law Institute. Original article appeared Feb. 5, 2018.
Healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses (“covered entities”) and business associates are subject to significant penalties for violations of the HIPAA Privacy, Security and Breach Notification Rules. To make matters worse, covered entities may be liable for their business associates’ misconduct, and business associates may be liable for their subcontractors’ violations. Covered entities and business associates must take appropriate steps to minimize exposure for their business associates’ or subcontractors’ violations. Read more
Mandatory Flu Vaccines Land Healthcare Facility In Court
/in Employee BenefitsBy Bradley Cave
After rescinding a job offer to an applicant, a Michigan healthcare provider finds itself in federal court defending a religious accommodation claim. If your organization requires employees to get flu vaccines, your policy should address how to handle religious objections. Here are details from the complaint that resulted in this recent discrimination lawsuit and steps you should take when facing similar circumstances.
Prospective Employee Suggests Reasonable Accommodation to Flu Shot
According to the complaint filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Yvonne Bair applied for a medical transcriptionist position in early 2016 with Memorial Healthcare, a non-profit corporation located in Owosso, Michigan. The transcription position would involve working from home, but also required two months of training at Memorial Healthcare’s hospital in Owosso at the start of employment. Read more