1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Appeals Court Ruling Permits "Disproportionate Share Payment" Reopenings and Authorizes "Mandamus" Review of Medicare Action

Appeals Court Ruling Permits "Disproportionate Share Payment" Reopenings and Authorizes "Mandamus" Review of Medicare Action

Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.28.01

In an important pro-hospital ruling secured by Crowell & Moring partner Bob Roth, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has required CMS to permit the plaintiff hospitals to reopen Medicare cost reports to effectuate the disproportionate share hospital ("DSH") policy change. On July 27, 2001, the Court decided Monmouth Medical Center v. Thompson. The Court overturned the part of Ruling 97-2 that barred hospitals from reopening cost reports to recalculate the DSH payment in accordance with the new methodology in the 97-2 ruling. Also important for its implications for future efforts to secure judicial review of Medicare agency action, the Court reversed the lower court's dismissal of the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding that the lower court should have exercised mandamus jurisdiction to order the relief sought.

The Monmouth decision may be helpful for other hospitals, particularly those with potential claims relating to Notices of Program Reimbursement issued on or after February 27, 1994. Hospitals that qualify for relief under this decision may be able to proceed directly to court in the District of Columbia without having to exhaust administrative remedies. It is not yet clear what, if any, further appellate review the government might seek.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.28.24

UK Government Seeks to Loosen Third Party Litigation Funding Regulation

On 19 March 2024, the Government followed through on a promise from the Ministry of Justice to introduce draft legislation to reverse the effect of  R (on the application of PACCAR Inc & Ors) v Competition Appeal Tribunal & Ors [2023] UKSC 28.  The effect of this ruling was discussed in our prior alert and follow on commentary discussing its effect on group competition litigation and initial government reform proposals. Should the bill pass, agreements to provide third party funding to litigation or advocacy services in England will no longer be required to comply with the Damages-Based Agreements Regulations 2013 (“DBA Regulations”) to be enforceable....