Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

St Louis Injury Attorney Cites Article Regarding Medicare Reimbursements In Personal Injury Cases

Tuesday, June 21st, 2011

It’s unclear what changes the contractor might make and whether it will follow last month’s decision in Haro v. Sebelius, but its temporary suspension of  “rights and responsibilities” letters and demand letters has caused problems for plaintiffs. One attorney notes that an insurance company refused to send a settlement check without Medicare’s demand letter.

By Allison Torres Burtka

After a federal judge in Arizona held that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) had overstepped its authority regarding Medicare reimbursement claims in Haro v.Sebelius last month, the Medicare Secondary PayerRecovery Contractor (MSPRC) temporarily stopped issuing “rights and responsibilities” letters and demand letters. It has finished reviewing the rights and responsibilities letter and resumed issuing them on June 10, but it is still reviewing the demand letter.

In the meantime, “there are thousands of injury cases across the country being held hostage” because they don’t have final demand letters, said Jay Vaughn, a trial lawyer in Florence, Kentucky. He noted that he recently settled a case with an insurance company, but it refused to send the settlement check without Medicare’s demand letter.

The suspension also delays conditional payment letters, because MSPRC sends them out 65 days after rights and responsibilities letters. This delay “will affect plaintiff attorneys’ ability to evaluate cases, evaluate settlement for clients, and meaningfully participate in settlement discussions,” said Caitlin Palacios, a Washington, D.C., lawyer.

In Haro, the court enjoined CMS from demanding payment of a Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) reimbursement claim and threatening collection actions before an appeal or waiver request could be resolved. It also said the agency may not demand that attorneys withhold liability proceeds from their clients while a disputed MSP reimbursement claim is pending. (2011 WL 2040219 (D. Ariz. May 9, 2011).)

The plaintiffs included beneficiaries and an attorney representing beneficiaries. Judge David Bury wrote that “the secretary’s application of the 60-day reimbursement requirement to support immediate collection activities against beneficiaries when the reimbursement claim is in dispute is neither rational nor consistent with the statutory scheme providing for waiver and appeal rights.”

The lawyer plaintiff had argued that requiring him to pay incorrect reimbursement claims would create a conflict of interest because doing so would go against his client’s best interests. The court held that no statutory authority supports a direct action against lawyers and that CMS cannot hold them financially responsible for MSP reimbursement if they do not turn their clients’ awards over to Medicare.

The court also certified a class of “persons who are or will be subject to MSP recovery, and from whom defendant has demanded or will demand payment of MSP claims before there have been determinations of the correct amounts through the waiver or appeal process.”

It’s unclear what changes MSPRC might make and whether it will follow Haro, lawyers say.

“The changes should be good for clients and their attorneys who wish to seek waivers and compromises,” Palacios said. “Previously, the demand for payment of disputed funds up front under threat of collection actions–even before the waiver or appeal had been considered–had a chilling effect on those considering seeking waivers and compromises.”

Vaughn said he hopes that any changes will streamline the process. “The Medicare reimbursement process has caused a lot of frustration and confusion among the practicing bar–attorneys on both sides–and insurance companies,” he said. “It shouldn’t be that hard.”

Phoenix lawyer Frank Verderame said Medicare may try to go through Congress to get around the Haro injunction. Meanwhile, he noted, the uncertainty in the MSP process is “creating a hardship for elderly and disabled clients.”

“It’s a chronic problem that’s not going to go away,” he said.

Missouri Workmans Compensation Attorney Says Dont Believe Them When They Tell You That Your Carpal Tunnel Isnt Work Related

Thursday, July 15th, 2010

You work at a job where you perform repetitive work with your hands.Maybe you are a secretary who does alot of typing.Maybe you are a forklift operator,or you are a scanner at a grocery store.Suddenly you begin to notice that your hands have been falling asleep and your grip seems weaker.At first you brush it off,but the symptoms keep getting worse.In time you cant get a good nights sleep because your hands keep you up.It reaches the point that you can no longer ignore it.You eventually see your family doctor who tells you that you have carpal tunnel syndrome.Your doctor asks you what you do for a living and you explain that your job requires you to perform alot of repetitive work with your hands.Your doctor tells you that your condition may be work related.Finally,you report this to your employer and their insurance company sends you to one of their “chosen doctors”.You go the appointment and you are told,”sorry”,but your condition is not related to your work.You are told that it is due to your “age” or it is because you are a “middle-aged woman”. Maybe you are told that it is because you are “overweight” or you are”diabetic”.You are given every reason in the world why your condition isnt work-related.In addition,you are asked about your smoking and drinking habits as well as questions about your hobbies and you are told that your hobbies are causing your condition.In your heart though,you know that your condition is related to your work.Does this sound familiar?..My advice is simple-dont believe them!Insurance companies have lists of doctors that they use to deny carpal tunnel claims.Everyday in my practice,I see these situations arise and we ultimately settle,or win these kinds of claims in court on a routine basis.An attorney will only charge a fee based on a successful result.So there is nothing to loose by contacting a workers compensation attorney to help you.Everyday workers walk away from good claims based on opinions from insurance company doctors who are rewarded handsomely for their opinions.Consequently,it is important to protect yourself by learning your rights. JEFF SWANEYCONTACT AT 314-481-7778

Choosing The Best Injury/Disability Attorney In St Louis For Your Case

Tuesday, June 29th, 2010

How can you choose the best injury attorney in St Louis for your case? First, it is important to understand that there are many different areas of practice.Some attorneys focus their practice on car accident cases.This generally involves alot of negotiations and frequent jury trials.Other attorneys focus on work comp cases and deal with trials in front of work comp judges.Other attorneys focus on Social Security disability claims.This involves hearings in front of social security judges and having a keen understanding of what is needed to document disability.There are also attorneys who focus on complex litigation involving medical malpractice cases and products liability claims.It is important when you contact an attorney to find out how much of his time is spent practicing in the area that you need.Experience is critical to the sucess of your claim.Second,it is important to find out if an attorney is going to personally handle your case,or whether he is going to hand you off to an inexperienced underling.Third,you need to determine if the attorney has a personality that is compatable with yours. It is definitely difficult to work with someone that you dont like.Finally,you need to determine whether the attorney enjoys a good reputation in the legal community.You want someone who is both competent and trustworthy.  JEFF SWANEY  Phone #314-481-7778

Missouri Work Comp Lawyer says that You Cannot Be Legally Fired For Filing Your Claim

Monday, November 30th, 2009

Discrimination because of exercising compensation rights prohibited –civil action for damages.

287.780. No employer or agent shall discharge or in any way discriminate against any employee for exercising any of his rights under this chapter. Any employee who has been discharged or discriminated against shall have a civil action for damages against his employer.

(RSMo 1939 § 3725, A.L. 1973 H.B. 79)

Prior revision: 1929 § 3335

(1979) Plaintiff who alleges discharge due to filing of a worker’s compensation claim has burden of proving the cause of action. Henderson v. St. Louis Housing Authority (Mo.), 605 S.W.2d 800.

(1993) The rights and remedies provided by this section are independent of, in addition to, any rights provided by a collective bargaining agreement. Claim for retaliatory discharge under statute is not preempted by federal labor law. Cook v. Hussmann Corp., 852 S.W.2d 342 (Mo. en banc).

(1998) Law does not abolish the “at-will” doctrine but provides a limited exception. Crabtree v. Bugby, 967 S.W.2d 66 (Mo.banc).
The Language in the law is quite clear that an employee cannot be fired for filing a legitimate work injury claim. An employer can fire an employee for just cause or for business reasons.If the real reason for firing an employee is for filing a work injury claim and other reasons are given to mask the true motive,then the firing would be illegal.There can be difficulties with proof ,but this a question which can be decided by a jury in a civil case.Make no mistake about it , however, that firing an injured employee for asserting a work injury claim is definitely contrary to the law and damages can be awarded against an employer for such conduct. SUBMITTED BY JEFF SWANEY 314-481-7778 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

St. Louis Social Security Disability Lawyer Cites Efforts To Speed UP Hearings

Tuesday, October 20th, 2009
News Page — SSA to Hire Additional Staff & Open New Hearing Offices
In testimony on April 28, 2009, before the House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee, SSA updated Congress regarding its plans to use the funds appropriated for fiscal year 2009 and under the stimulus legislation to open new hearing offices and hire additional, desperately needed staff. The stimulus funds ($500 million) will allow SSA to hire more than 2000 additional staff: 39 new ALJs; more than 500 ODAR support staff; 1500 staff for field offices; and 300 DDS disability examiners. When combined with the fiscal year 2009 appropriation, SSA expects to hire more than 7000 new employees, which includes additional staff and replacing vacancies, by September 2009.You can follow SSA’s hiring on its website that reports on its use of the stimulus funds, www.ssa.gov/recovery. The website includes weekly reports that detail SSA activities, including hires for its different components, broken down by SSA region.

At the April 28 hearing, SSA stated its plans to open 13 new ODAR hearing offices in the following locations:

 

  • Phoenix, AZ
  • St. Petersburg, FL
  • Tallahassee, FL
  • Atlanta South, GA
  • Danville or Portage, IN
  • Topeka, KS
  • Livonia, MI
  • Mt. Pleasant, MI
  • Fayetteville, NC
  • Akron, OH
  • Toledo, OH
  • Auburn, WA
  • Madison, WI

In March 2009, the Commissioner announced plans for 10 new hearing offices but decided to expand the number to 13. In addition, three new National Hearing Center locations are planned:

 

  • Albuquerque, NM (opened March 2009)
  • Chicago, IL (late fiscal year 2009)
  • Baltimore, MD (early fiscal year 2010)

FREE CONSULTATION JEFF SWANEY 314-481-7777

St. Louis Injury Attorney Cites Debate Over Helmut Missouri Safety

Wednesday, June 17th, 2009

As a personal injury attorney, I would welcome comments from bikers.   JEFF SWANEY FREE CONSULTATION 314-481-7778 

Missouri could change motorcycle helmet law

 

 

10:06 AM CDT on Thursday, April 30, 2009

 

 

 
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — Legislation modifying Missouri’s motorcycle helmet law is on its way to the governor.

The bill would allow those 21 and older to ride without helmets on all Missouri roads except interstate highways.

The House gave the bill final approval Wednesday on a vote of 93-65. It cleared the Senate earlier.

Proposals to repeal the mandatory helmet law have been controversial in the past. But this year’s measure, to simply modify the law, received little debate in either chamber.

Supporters of Missouri’s existing helmet law say the protective headgear keeps motorcyclists safer during a potentially dangerous activity.

But some motorcycle enthusiasts contend it’s more fun to ride without a helmet. They’ve argued that the state should micromanage their lives.

  • Print this story
  • St. Louis Attorney Posts Info regarding General Motors Bankruptcy and Workers Comp Benefits

    Tuesday, June 9th, 2009

    Article cited to keep up with GM bankruptcy and its affect on workers compensation claims. JEFF SWANEY FREE CONSULTATION 314-481-7778
    (June 1, 2009 – Madison, WI) Self insurance directors had a jolting start to their work week as headlines of General Motors bankruptcy petition filled the news yesterday. The so called “first day motion” to the court included a petition to continue wages and benefits to GM’s workforce. As part of this motion, General Motors’ management took the position that payment for all workers’ compensation benefits, whether for future or past claims, was in the best interest of preserving the commitment of its labor force. Thus, the petition calls for the payment of all workers’ compensation benefits for any of its past or present employees, administrative expenses, and any workers compensation insurance premiums due, with exceptions for certain states, as noted below.

    It is assumed that GM will continue premium payments, as most companies in bankruptcy place high priority in maintaining health and disability insurance. In fact, it is commonly assumed that a company’s assets can be best preserved by continuation of normal operations until the court deliberates on reorganization and releases the organization from bankruptcy as a viable entity.

    The petition before the court includes workers’ compensation liabilities for active plants and operations, as well as incurred claims for ongoing workers’ compensation benefits in many jurisdictions where operations have ceased. According to the petition, the magnitude of past claims is enormous:

    As of the Commencement Date approximately 12,500 workers’ compensation claims were pending against the Debtors. The Debtors estimate that the aggregate amount payable on account of incurred but not yet paid claims and IBNR claims arising prior to the Commencement Date is approximately $1.47 billion. Of course, not all of this amount is immediately due, but rather would be payable throughout the succeeding months and even years. The Debtors estimate that cash payments for the next 12 months related to prepetition workers’ compensation claims will be approximately $240 million.

    The formal request to honor these past payments is stated as follows:

    The Debtors intend to continue to review the proposed treatment of the Debtors’ obligations under Workers Compensation programs in the various states in which they operate or have in the past operated. Although this review is ongoing, the Debtors seek authority to pay all amounts related to workers’ compensation claims and IBNR claims that arose prior to the Commencement Date as they become due in the ordinary course of business (including reimbursements of administrators for claims paid by them), including all insurance premiums and administrative costs, and to continue their Workers’ Compensation Programs in the ordinary course, as deemed necessary to continue to operate and preserve value in the exercise of their business judgment in all states other than Alabama, Georgia, New Jersey and Oklahoma. In these four states, the Debtors do not currently intend to pay amounts related to workers’ compensation claims and IBNR claims that arose prior to the Commencement Date.

    A GM official commented that Alabama, Georgia, New Jersey, and Oklahoma were omitted because they have no current GM operations. However, Greg Krohm, Executive Director of the IAIABC notes, “Even if collateral or surety coverage is sufficient to pay all future claims, there is likely going to be at least a few weeks delay in initiating payments in these four states. Moreover, the adequacy of security at ultimate payout is not guaranteed.”

    How quickly the court will respond to the petition is unclear. If the Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of New York rules that evidentiary filings and hearings are called for, turning claims over to sureties or third party administrators will inevitably result in some interruptions in benefit payments. The company rationale to the court for priority preference for these claims is:

    If the Debtors are not authorized to pay their prepetition workers’ compensation obligations, the Debtors expect that the letters of credit, security deposits, and/or surety bonds will be drawn, resulting in millions of dollars of claims against the Debtors’ estates. Moreover, if they are not permitted to honor their workers’ compensation obligations, (a) alternative arrangements for workers’ compensation coverage likely would be more costly, (b) the failure to provide coverage may, in some states, subject the Debtors or their officers to significant penalties and possibly a shut down of operations, and (c) the Debtors may have their qualified self-insured employer status revoked in the respective states, resulting in substantially higher costs.

    “If unopposed, this first day petition is likely to be granted. However, if creditors object the matter may be reopened,” according to Robert Aurbach, Principle, Uncommon Approach.

    Missouri Workers Compensation Attorney Watches Ohio Deal With Chryslers Work Comp Problems

    Tuesday, June 9th, 2009

    Chrysler sale   An interesting article regarding Chrysler’s workers compensation concrens. JEFF SWANEY FREE CONSULTATION 314-481-7778

    The state’s top lawyer is objecting to Chrysler LLC’s pending sale in federal bankruptcy court over worries that the Ohio workers’ compensation system could be saddled with the burden of the automaker’s self-insured claims under a new owner.

    The limited objection that Attorney General Richard Cordray filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in New York asked that the court delay a sale of the automaker until the company’s workers’ compensation obligations are “properly addressed.” Cordray’s office said that Auburn Hills, Mich.-based Chrysler, in bankruptcy filings, has committed to fulfilling workers’ compensation obligations, but the documents don’t shift the obligation to a new owner.

    That could put the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation on the hook for payment and administration of the company’s self-insured claims and take a bite out of Ohio’s self-insured guaranty fund. Such a burden would cause problems for all of the state’s self-insured workers, Cordray said.

    Chrysler employs about 5,000 of workers at factories scattered across the northern reaches of the state, mainly in the Toledo area, where it operates a major Jeep assembly operation and stamping plants.

    Marsha Ryan, administrator for the state Bureau of Workers’ Compensation, said the agency is “closely monitoring the situation with Chrysler and is prepared to effectively manage any transition of claims management.

    St. Louis Social Security Disability Lawyer Notes Decision Requiring That Judge May Not Substitute His Opinion For A Doctor

    Tuesday, June 2nd, 2009

    This is an interesting case which states that Social Security Judges cannot act as doctors in denying a social security claim.
    FREE CONSULTATION 314-481-7778

    Social Security: Denial Of Benefits – Mental Disability – Medical Noncompliance

    By Stephanie Maniscalco

    Pate-Fires v. Astrue (MLW No. 59069/Case No. 07-3561 – 22 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, Bye, J.)

    Where an administrative law judge denied the application for disability benefits and supplemental security income of a claimant with mental impairments based on his determination that she could perform her past relevant work as a retail store stocker, the medical evidence proved that the claimant suffered from a severe mental impairment and could not engage in gainful employment, and the ALJ’s contrary conclusion was not supported by substantial evidence because the claimant’s treating doctor found her to be disabled and the ALJ improperly disregarded the doctor’s opinion based on his own conclusion that the claimant’s drug use and refusal to take her medicine precluded a finding of disability.
    Judgment is reversed and remanded.

    ‘Playing doctor’

    “The ALJ’s conclusion Pate-Fires’s medical noncompliance was not justifiable and precludes a finding of disability is not supported by substantial evidence. Further, the ALJ’s determination Pate-Fires’s medical noncompliance is attributable solely to free will is tantamount to the ALJ ‘playing doctor,’ a practice forbidden by law.”

    Improper basis

    Dissenting opinion by Shepherd, J.: “I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that remand for an immediate award of benefits is the appropriate remedy in this case. At step four of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ decided that Pate-Fires retained the residual functional capacity to perform her past relevant work ‘The majority finds that the ALJ reached this step-four conclusion in error. Specifically, the ALJ relied on an improper basis to reject Dr. Erby’s opinion, and substantial evidence did not support the ALJ’s conclusion that Pate-Fires’s medical noncompliance precluded a finding of disability’ To the extent the majority’s decision to reverse the judgment of the district court is based on these errors in the ALJ’s step-four analysis, I concur.”

    Judgment is reversed and remanded.
    y claim.

    St. louis lawyer Posting Article on facet Syndrome

    Friday, May 22nd, 2009

    This is an interesting article on facet syndrome  which can be associated with whiplash injuries.

    Steven C. Ludwig, M.D., Chief of Spine Surgery, University of Maryland Medical Center
    January 4, 2008

    Question: What Is Facet Syndrome?

    Answer: Facet syndrome is a condition in which the joints in the back of the spine degenerate and subsequently cause pain.

    The facet joints are found at every level on both sides of the lumbar spine. They provide about 20 percent of the twisting stability in the low back. Each facet joint is positioned at each level of the spine to provide the needed support especially with rotation.

    Facet joints also prevent each vertebra from slipping over the one below. A small capsule surrounds each facet joint providing a nourishing lubricant for the joint.

    Also, each joint has a rich supply of tiny nerve fibers that provide a painful stimulus when the joint is injured or irritated. Inflamed facets can cause a powerful muscle spasm.