Health Law Advisor

I was recently quoted in an article titled "4th Circuit Upholds ACA's Employer Mandate, Says Insurance Regulation Within Commerce," by Mary Anne Pazanowski, in Bloomberg BNA's Health Care Daily Report. Following is an excerpt:

A unanimous U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit July 11 declared the Affordable Care Act's employer mandate a valid exercise of Congress's power to regulate commerce under the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause (Liberty University Inc. v. Lew, 4th Cir., No. 10-2347, 7/11/13).

In an opinion co-authored by Judges Diana Gribbon Motz, James A. Wynn ...

Our Epstein Becker Green colleague Stuart M. Gerson recently commented in an article titled "4th Circuit Upholds ACA's Employer Mandate, Says Insurance Regulation Within Commerce," by Mary Anne Pazanowski, in Bloomberg BNA's Health Care Daily Report.

Following is an excerpt:

A unanimous U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit July 11 declared the Affordable Care Act's employer mandate a valid exercise of Congress's power to regulate commerce under the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause (Liberty University Inc. v. Lew, 4th Cir., No. 10-2347, 7/11/13).

In an opinion ...

Our colleagues Kara Maciel, Frank C. Morris Jr., Elizabeth Bradley, and Adam Solander have posted a client advisory on the recent ACA employer mandate delay, exploring the ramifications and unresolved issues that employers should consider. Following is an excerpt:

In reaction to employers' concerns about the many difficulties posed in efforts to comply with the Employer Mandate provisions of the Affordable Care Act ("ACA"), the Obama administration ("Administration") announced late yesterday that it is delaying the implementation of the penalty provisions and other ...

I’ve posted a client advisory on the recent ACA employer mandate delay, with my colleagues Frank C. Morris, Jr.; Elizabeth Bradley; and Adam Solander.  We explore the ramifications and unresolved issues that employers should consider.  Following is an excerpt:

In reaction to employers' concerns about the many difficulties posed in efforts to comply with the Employer Mandate provisions of the Affordable Care Act ("ACA"), the Obama administration ("Administration") announced late yesterday that it is delaying the implementation of the penalty provisions and other aspects of ...

Christine Kearsley contributed to this article.

In Durham, North Carolina, the child psychiatrist comes to the classroom.  By telehealth. For the past eight years, Duke University Medical Center has teamed up with Durham Public Schools to export child psychiatry to where the kids are.  Duke fellows in child psychiatry travel to three elementary schools and one upper-school site to offer in-person mental health services to children with diagnosed mental health disorders.  To supervise the fellows, the attending physician conferences in.  As Dr. Richard D’Alli, the leader of the ...

By:  Elizabeth Bradley, Kara M. Maciel & Adam Solander

In breaking news, the Obama Administration has now acknowledged the significant regulatory burdens that the January 1, 2014 deadline under the Affordable Care Act would place on employers.  Based on reports, the ACA Employer Mandate has been delayed to 2015!  We understand that regulatory guidance will be forthcoming this week.

This is welcome news to employers across the country who have been struggling with compliance efforts under the ACA.

Stay tuned to this blog and www.ebglaw.com for additional information.

About two weeks ago, the Governor of Nevada signed into law new legislation that removes a number of barriers to the practice of telehealth within the state of Nevada.  Among the most significant changes, the Nevada legislation allows physicians to establish a physician-patient relationship (which is a precondition for prescribing drugs, rendering diagnoses, and performing other medical services) through a telehealth encounter.  In doing so, Nevada joins only a small number of states that have taken this step.  However the Nevada law is significant not only because it allows a ...

By:   Amy B. Messigian

In University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, one of two employment-related opinions issued on Monday by the Supreme Court, a narrow majority held that a retaliation claim brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must be proved according to a strict but for causation standard.  Under such a standard, a plaintiff must present proof that “the unlawful retaliation would not have occurred in the absence of the alleged wrongful action or actions of the employer.”

The underlying facts of the Nassar case are somewhat complicated.  The ...

Our colleague Julie Saker Schlegel at Epstein Becker Green recently posted “Supreme Court Holds That Only Employees Who Have Authority to Take Tangible Employment Actions Constitute Supervisors for the Purpose of Vicarious Liability Under Title VII” on the Retail Labor and Employment Law blog, and we think health industry employers will be interested.

Following is an excerpt:

In a 5-4 decision the dissent termed “decidedly employer-friendly,” the Supreme Court held on June 24, 2013 that only employees who have been empowered by the employer to take tangible ...

Before initiating treatment, health care providers must generally obtain their patients’ informed consent. The purpose of the informed consent process is two-fold. First, it allows patients to gain an understanding of the risks and benefits of the proposed treatment, and alternative courses of action. Second, it helps shield providers from legal exposure.

A formal informed consent process is particularly critical for procedures that carry a high risk of patient injury. When considering such “high-risk” procedures, neurosurgery or radiation therapy may come to mind ...