Resolving ERISA Liens and Reimbursement Claims in Personal Injury Cases
Narrowing Claims and Challenging Unreasonable Charges; Effect of Montanile on ERISA Plan Rights
A live 90-minute CLE webinar with interactive Q&A
This CLE webinar will give personal injury attorneys practical tips for negotiating and resolving ERISA liens and claims for reimbursement against personal injury settlements to maximize recovery for their clients.
Outline
- Overview of the law governing ERISA reimbursement in the context of personal injury settlements
- Best practices for personal injury counsel for negotiating and resolving liens and reimbursement claims
- Timing of the lien negotiation
- Obtain and review all health insurance coverage and the summary plan description during client intake
- Exhaust all other available medical coverage
- Request and review the lien
- Narrow the claims
- Dispute unreasonable items
- Update on other types of liens
- FEHBA
- MAO
- Medicare refunds
Benefits
The panel will review these and other relevant issues:
- What are the latest developments and applicable case law related to ERISA claims for reimbursement?
- What steps should personal injury attorneys take to ensure the most favorable result for their clients when negotiating an ERISA lien?
- Are personal injury attorneys required to notify ERISA plans of third-party claims and settlements?
Faculty
Professor Roger Baron
Professor Emeritus
University of South Dakota
Professor Emeritus Roger Baron, University of South Dakota School of Law, has authored numerous articles on Subrogation... | Read More
Professor Emeritus Roger Baron, University of South Dakota School of Law, has authored numerous articles on Subrogation and ERISA Reimbursement issues. Mr. Baron’s Mercer Law Review article on ERISA reimbursement has been cited by three federal district courts in written opinions handed down in Illinois, New Jersey, and Washington. One of his earlier articles on subrogation was cited by the U.S. District Court of Nebraska (Judge Urbom) in a 2003 decision denying subrogation. More recently, the Supreme Court of Hawaii (2017) cited and relied upon one of his articles in denying the efforts by health insurers to undermine Hawaii’s protective legislation.
Mr. Baron has also been actively involved in ERISA reimbursement litigation, representing clients and lawyers in state and federal courts across the country. He has participated in three U.S. Supreme Court proceedings -- he co-authored an amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court in McCutchen v. U.S. Airways, filed on behalf of several trial lawyer organizations; he was part of the small team of lawyers who represented Joel and Marlene Sereboff in the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court Sereboff case; and he worked with the lawyers representing Deborah and James Shank in their case involving Wal-Mart in 2008-09. Although the Supreme Court denied the Shank’s Petition for Writ of Cert, the public outcry caused Wal-Mart to re-evaluate its policy. Upon re-evaluation, Wal-Mart permitted the Shanks to retain all of their settlement recovery and also change its plan document for the handling of future reimbursement cases.
David L. Place, JD
Owner
The Place Firm
Mr. Place exclusively assists personal injury victims and plaintiff counsel with complex lien resolution problems using... | Read More
Mr. Place exclusively assists personal injury victims and plaintiff counsel with complex lien resolution problems using his vast knowledge of the other side’s techniques. Mr. Place spent fourteen years representing large private group health insurance plans, self-funded ERISA groups, FEHBA plans, Medicare Advantage plans, state Medicaid plans, as well as stop-loss and disability plans in their subrogation/recovery programs. He asserted subrogation/reimbursement rights for those groups in all fifty states, personally recovering nearly one hundred million dollars for the insurance industry.
CloseLive Webinar
Buy Live Webinar
Includes Early Discount Savings of $50 (through 09/06/19)
Live Webinar
$147