CFPB's Larger Participant Rule for Consumer Payments - Payments Pros: The Payments Law Podcast
Hooper, Kearney and Macklin on Cutting Edge Topics in the False Claims Act
The obvious preference for the average person is never to be involved in litigation. For those forced to become party to a lawsuit, however, the dream then becomes prevailing on a motion for summary judgment. With such a...more
Davies’ Canadian Mergers & Acquisitions guide draws on our substantial cross-border M&A experience to offer guidance on both the legal framework and practical aspects of Canadian mergers and acquisitions, including critical...more
In this episode of Payments Pros, our hosts Keith Barnett, Carlin McCrory, and Josh McBeain join their colleague Chris Willis to discuss the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) larger participant rule for consumer...more
In a pair of cases decided by the Second Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal, the Court reiterated the difference between procedural and substantive unconscionability when it comes to invalidating arbitration...more
While the pandemic put many things on hold, it did not do the same for the False Claims Act (FCA). To find out what is happening in FCA activity we spoke with Patrick Hooper, Jordan Kearney and Alicia Macklin, partners at the...more
On January 19, 2021 the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the “DC Circuit”) vacated the Affordable Clean Energy Rule (the “ACE Rule”), a policy instituted by the Environmental Protection...more
Last month, I noted that the Trump administration had suffered “one final judicial defeat” – the rejection of its Affordable Clean Energy Rule. Of course, I spoke to soon. Last week, Judge Brian Morris rejected EPA’s rule...more
As we previously discussed earlier this month, District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson issued an Order in American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations v. National Labor Relations Board, Civil Case...more
In this week’s episode, Adam Cooper discusses the Supreme Court’s decision in Azar v. Allina Health Services, as well as a related memorandum issued in late 2019 by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) that...more
One of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s top priorities has been to stop employers from instituting blanket bans on hiring individuals with criminal records. The EEOC’s focus stems from national data suggesting...more
The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of General Counsel (OGC) offered the healthcare industry the benefit of its legal analysis of the recent US Supreme Court opinion in Azar v. Allina Health Services...more
On October 31, 2019, the Office of General Counsel for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued an important memo from Kelly M. Cleary, CMS Chief Legal Officer, and Brenna E. Jenny, Deputy General...more
On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court issued an eagerly anticipated opinion in Azar v. Allina Health Services, a decision with far-reaching implications both for the calculation of disproportionate share payments and provider...more
The Medicare Program, established in 1965, initially seemed simple: provide health care for senior citizens by paying hospitals and doctors directly for the care the seniors required. Initially, there were two parts to...more
On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Azar v. Allina Health Services, et al., Case No. 17-1484. The Court ruled in favor of a group of hospitals in a dispute over Medicare disproportionate share...more
On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) issued an opinion in Azar v. Allina Health Services whereby it ruled that the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) violated the Medicare...more
In a 7-to-1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 3, 2019, held that “Because the Department of Health and Human Services neglected its statutory notice-and-comment obligations when it revealed a new policy that...more
In a landmark decision on June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court held that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was required to engage in notice and comment rulemaking before publishing methodology (Medicare Fractions)...more
On June 3, 2019, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Azar v. Allina Health Services, delivering a multi-billion dollar victory for hospitals that serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients by...more
On 3 June 2019 the U.S. Supreme Court held in Azar v. Allina Health Services that Medicare interpretive guidance must go through notice-and-comment if it establishes or changes a substantive legal standard governing payment,...more
Earlier this week, the Supreme Court upheld a D.C. Circuit Court decision vacating a policy of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) that would have “dramatically – and retroactively – reduced payments to...more
On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court (“Court”) issued a 7-1 decision in Azar v. Allina Health Services, favoring hospitals that had sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) over a Medicare payment...more
In a 7-1 decision released June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a proposal of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that would have had the effect of significantly reducing Disproportionate Share...more
In a major win for providers that serve a disproportionate share of indigent patients, the Supreme Court today upheld the D.C. Circuit’s earlier decision invalidating CMS’s policy to treat beneficiaries enrolled in Part C...more
On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Azar v. Allina Health Services that the Medicare statute requires the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) to engage in public notice-and-comment rulemaking...more