Editor’s Note: In the article below, Manatt discusses the Ninth Circuit’s new opinion in the ongoing Wit v. United Behavioral Health litigation and the changes from the now-vacated January 2023 Wit decision. ...more
8/31/2023
/ Abuse of Discretion ,
Article III ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) ,
Department of Labor (DOL) ,
Employee Benefits ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Exhaustion Doctrine ,
Health Insurance ,
Medical Necessity ,
Mental Health ,
Mental Health Parity Rule ,
MHPAEA ,
Standard of Care ,
Standing ,
U.S. Treasury
On October 13, 2021, the California Court of Appeal, 1st District in San Francisco issued its opinion in Gray v. Dignity Health, 2021 WL 4771982. In a published decision that will likely control the outcome in at least six...more
10/28/2021
/ Class Action ,
Disclosure Requirements ,
Duty to Disclose ,
Emergency Rooms ,
Failure To Disclose ,
Goods or Services ,
Health Care Providers ,
Healthcare Costs ,
Hospitals ,
Liability ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Price Transparency ,
Transparency
On August 12, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Natarajan v. Dignity Health, No. S259364. The case addresses the potential bias of hearing officers appointed to preside over hospital administrative...more
Manatt Defeats Putative Class Action in Federal Appeals Decision Interpreting the ACA’s Medical Loss Ratio Provision -
On March 18, 2019, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought against Manatt client...more
On October 10, 2014, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a grant of summary judgment in favor of Manatt client The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company. In an unpublished memorandum opinion, the Ninth Circuit held that a health care...more
This week the Ninth Circuit affirmed a grant of summary judgment in favor of USAA Life Insurance Company, holding that the insurer was entitled to rescind the policy under California law when it discovered that its insured...more
The California Court of Appeal, in a 2-to-1 decision, has reaffirmed the constitutional limitations on the amount of punitive damages a jury may award against an insurer. In Nickerson v. Stonebridge Life Insurance Company,...more
In an opinion issued late last week, the California Supreme Court interpreted the Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. (the “UCL”), to allow a UCL unlawfulness claim based on a “borrowed” federal...more
The California Supreme Court yesterday issued a decision that confirms an expansive view of the scope of the unfair competition law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. (the “UCL”). The Court held that an insured may sue...more