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.


Non-Physicians Owning or Investing in Medical Practices in Idaho
/in Physician PracticesBy Kim Stanger
The Idaho Board of Medicine’s recent disavowal of the corporate practice of medicine doctrine has made it easier for corporations and non-physician individuals to invest in or own medical practices in Idaho.
The Corporate Practice of Medicine. For decades, the Idaho Board of Medicine took the position that, with limited exceptions, the Idaho Medical Practice Act “prohibits unlicensed corporations and entities from hiring physicians as employees to provide medical services to patients.” (Memo from J. Uranga to Idaho State Bd. of Medicine dated 2/26/07). This “corporate practice of medicine” doctrine (“CPOM”) had its foundation in a 1952 Idaho Supreme Court case which held that:
[n]o unlicensed person or entity may engage in the practice of the medical profession though licensed employees; nor may a licensed physician practice as an employee of an unlicensed person or entity. Such practices are contrary to public policy.
(Worlton v. Davis, 73 Idaho 217, 221 (1952)). The Board of Medicine warned that violations of the doctrine may result in disciplinary action against physicians and, more recently, physician assistants. Entities that improperly employed physicians or physician assistants risked the possibility of criminal action for the unauthorized practice of medicine. Read more
Marketing Traps for Healthcare Providers
/in ProvidersBy Kim Stanger
Common marketing practices in other industries may be illegal in the healthcare sector. Healthcare providers should beware the following practices when marketing their services:
1. Offering gifts, rewards, or free or discounted items or services to patients. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) and Civil Monetary Penalties Law (“CMPL”) generally prohibit offering anything of value to induce patients to order or receive services payable by federal healthcare programs unless the arrangement fits a regulatory safe harbor.1 Violations may result in criminal, civil and administrative penalties.2 Common marketing programs that may implicate the laws include but are not limited to: Read more
Police, Providers, Patients and HIPAA
/in HIPAABy Kim Stanger
Recent cases have highlighted the conflict that may occur when police seek access to patients or patient information. Here are some general guidelines for physicians and other healthcare providers when facing demands from police or other law enforcement officials.
Disclosing Patient Information. The HIPAA privacy rules (45 CFR § 164.501 et seq.) generally prohibit healthcare providers from disclosing protected health information to law enforcement officials without the patient’s written authorization unless certain conditions are met. HIPAA allows disclosures for law enforcement purposes in the following cases:
Read more
Offering Free Screening Tests to Patients
/in Fraud and AbuseBy Kim Stanger
Healthcare providers often offer free screening tests or services as a way to generate business for their facility or practice; however, doing so may violate federal and state laws unless structured properly. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”)1 and Civil Monetary Penalties Law (“CMPL”)2 generally prohibit offering free or discounted items or services to patients as a way to generate business payable by Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs unless the arrangement fits within a regulatory exception.3 Violations of the AKS or CMPL may result in criminal, civil, and/or administrative penalties. Read more
Consent Forms v. Informed Consent
/in ConsentBy Kim Stanger
Except in emergencies, healthcare practitioners must generally obtain the patient’s informed consent before providing treatment.1 If the patient lacks capacity due to age or incompetence, consent must be obtained from a personal representative authorized by law to provide consent.2 Failure to obtain or properly document informed consent may subject practitioners to civil, administrative, and/or criminal liability. It is therefore important to periodically review consent processes and forms to ensure that they adequately establish and document valid informed consent. Read more