Federal Appeals Court Deals Legal Blow to NICA Fund
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit refused to reconsider a ruling by a three-judge panel that cleared the way for the lawsuit against the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association.
July 22, 2022 at 01:23 PM
3 minute read
Health CareA Florida program that pays for care of children who suffer neurological injuries at birth will continue facing a federal lawsuit about whether it inappropriately shifted costs to Medicaid.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on Wednesday refused to reconsider an April ruling by a three-judge panel that cleared the way for the lawsuit against the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association. The program, which sought a rehearing before the full appeals court, argued that it should be shielded from the lawsuit because of sovereign immunity.
In a May motion seeking the rehearing, the program, commonly known as NICA, pointed to potentially broad implications of the three-judge panel's ruling.
"The panel's unprecedented approach and destabilizing ruling make this an exceptionally important case," the motion said. "NICA's authorizing statutes grant it sovereign immunity under state law. The panel's refusal to honor that choice by the Legislature raises serious federalism concerns and infringes upon Florida's sovereignty."
As is common, Wednesday's decision to deny a rehearing did not give a detailed explanation.
NICA was created by the Legislature in 1988 amid concerns about high costs of medical-malpractice insurance for obstetricians. It operates as a no-fault system that provides money to pay for the care of children born with certain neurological injuries, helping prevent doctors from facing lawsuits over the injuries.
Doctors and hospitals pay "assessments" to finance the program, which also receives investment income.
The lawsuit, filed in 2019 in South Florida, alleges that NICA has improperly considered itself a "payer of last resort," effectively meaning that Medicaid could be required to pay costs before NICA steps in. The plaintiffs contend that violates a federal law known as the False Claims Act because Medicaid is supposed to be the payer of last resort.
NICA argued in federal district court and the Atlanta-based appeals court that the lawsuit should be dismissed because the program is an "arm" of the state and, as a result, is entitled to immunity.
But U.S. District Judge William Dimitrouleas and the appeals-court panel refused to dismiss the case. The panel said, for example, the state does not exercise substantial control over the program and that NICA, after receiving an initial $20 million from the state, is funded through assessments and investment income.
"NICA's budget is not subject to approval by the state … the voluntary assessments NICA collects are more like malpractice insurance premiums [which are traditionally collected by private insurance companies] than like taxes, and NICA's primary source of funding comes from investment income rather than state fund," the April panel ruling said.
The lawsuit was filed by Veronica Arven and the estate of her late husband, Theodore Arven. The couple had filed a similar whistleblower case against a Virginia program that led to Virginia reaching a $20 million settlement with the federal government. The Arvens' child participated in the Virginia program, according to the April appeals-court ruling.
Medicaid is jointly funded by the federal government and state governments.
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAmid Growing Litigation Volume, Don't Expect UnitedHealthcare to Change Its Stripes After CEO's Killing
6 minute readFreeman Mathis & Gary Taps Orlando for Third New Florida Office This Year
3 minute readFla.'s Statute of Limitations and Statutes of Repose in Med Mal Cases: It's Not Over Until It's Over
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250