Health Care Law Blog
The Michigan Supreme Court has issued an important decision on the scope of peer review protection. In Krusac v Covenant Med Ctr, Inc, the court held that “objective facts gathered contemporaneously with an event” are protected when “contained in an otherwise privileged incident report.” Krusac overruled a Court of Appeals opinion, Harrison v Munson Healthcare, which ruled that peer review protection only applied to the evaluative content in an incident report. Krusac reinforces the broad protections for “records, data and knowledge” that is collected by or for peer review committees.
While Krusac clarifies the scope of the statutory protection, it also highlights the need for hospitals and health facilities to carefully structure and properly document their peer review processes. It will be especially important in litigation to establish that a committee or individual has been assigned a peer review function and that information is being collected for the purpose of reducing morbidity and mortality and improving patient care.
Richard Kraus of Foster Swift filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of the University of Michigan Health System in Krusac.
On February 18, 2015, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) provided further guidance related to the issue of how certain employer health insurance reimbursement arrangements are treated under the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”).
As we explained in a previous post, after the Health Insurance Marketplace opened for business, many employers recommended that their employees use it to purchase individual health insurance policies, with the promise that the premium costs would be reimbursed by the employer. In fact, such employee reimbursement strategies were aggressively marketed to employers as a solution to reduce costs and comply with the requirements of the ACA. Little did these employers (and marketers) know, such arrangements exposed the employers to significant penalties under the ACA.
Prior guidance made clear that such arrangements – whether funded on a pre- or post-tax basis – may be subject to the ACA’s market reforms. Employers that offer reimbursement arrangements that violate the ACA are subject to a $100 per day per affected employee penalty.
Notice 2015-17 clarifies previous guidance and provides transition relief to certain small employers from ACA penalties. Key aspects of the new guidance are noted below.
On March 12, 2015 Foster Swift Attorney Jennifer Van Regenmorter co-presented the Michigan Health Law Update (“Annual Update”) at the 21st Annual Health Law Institute. The Annual Update provides an overview of the most significant Michigan-specific health law developments from the past year, many of which have been covered on this blog. This article will summarize the highlights from this year’s Annual Update.
Foster Swift health care attorneys recently attended and presented at the 21st Annual Health Law Institute on March 12 and 13, 2015. The two-day institute, which was co-sponsored by the Institute for Continuing Legal Education and the Health Care Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan, included presentations on recent statutory, regulatory, and case law developments in the health care industry.
Foster Swift Attorney Jennifer Van Regenmorter co-presented the “Michigan Health Law Update,” which provided an overview of Michigan’s most significant health law developments from the past year. This was Van Regenmorter’s third time presenting this yearly update at the Institute.
