Details Matter: Medical Plan Anti-Assignment Clauses Protect Employers

11 June 2018 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog
Authors: Gregg H. Dooge

Yes, details matter. This is true on many fronts, including whether the documents governing the medical plan offered to employees prohibit employees and their dependents from assigning their plan benefit rights to a health care provider.

Many employers purchase insured medical programs, and for these programs the essential terms of the medical program are controlled by the insurance carrier and embedded within the insurance contract. However, nearly one-half of employer-sponsored health plans are self-insured or funded through a combination of insurance and self-insurance. For self-funded plans, many employers have little understanding regarding the details of the medical plan document.

Why is this important? Well, for one thing, there is a growing trend in which out-of-network health care providers attempt to bring suit directly against the employer or the employer medical plan, seeking additional recovery where the plan pays only a portion of the amount billed by the provider.  Normally, ERISA authorizes lawsuits by participants, but the provider often has the participant (patient) execute an “assignment of benefits,” which, if valid, permits the health care provider to “step into the shoes” of the patient and sue for additional benefits to the same extent as the patient could do.

The key words, of course, are “if valid.” There are a series of cases holding that an employer medical plan may prohibit a participant or dependent from assigning his or her benefit rights to the health care provider.  If the medical plan prohibits assignment, the health care provider generally is unable to bring a recovery action against the employer or employer medical plan.  On the other hand, if the medical plan permits (or does not prohibit) assignment of benefits, the health care provider that has obtained an assignment of benefits can (and likely will) bring suit directly against the employer or employer medical plan.

Thus, the plan details —  and, in particular, whether the plan prohibits assignment of benefits  —  can be critically important.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services

Insights

CMS Proposes Enhanced Scrutiny over Medicaid Supplemental Payments
20 November 2019
Health Care Law Today
The Purpose of a Corporation
November 2019
Legal News: Business Law
Should This Be a "Mobility" Industry Blog?
19 November 2019
Dashboard Insights
Data Processing Patent Eligibility: Federal Circuit Finds Claims Eligible in KPN v. Gemalto
19 November 2019
IP Litigation Current
PATH Summit 2019
18-20 December 2019
Arlington, VA
Madison CLE Days
18-19 December 2019
Madison, WI
MedTech Impact Expo & Conference
13-15 December 2019
Las Vegas, NV
HFMA MA-RI Annual Compliance Update
12 December 2019
Boston, MA