With the Arizona court system bogged down with healthcare cases, it isn’t surprising that most disputes don’t actually end up in court. In Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), trained, impartial persons known as “neutrals” decide disputes or help parties decide disputes themselves.

In mediation, a neutral mediator assists the parties in reaching a mutually acceptable resolution to their dispute. The mediator does not decide how the dispute is to be resolved, the parties do. Mediation is a cooperative process, in which the parties work together toward a resolution that tries to meet everyone’s interests, instead of working against each other.

In arbitration, a neutral arbitrator reviews evidence, hears arguments, and makes the decision to resolve the dispute. This is very different from mediation where the mediator helps the parties reach their own resolution. Arbitration is normally much speedier and less expensive than a lawsuit. Because of the large number of healthcare related cases awaiting trial in Arizona courts, a dispute normally can be heard much more quickly by an arbitrator than by a judge. Often a case that may take a week to try in court can be heard by an arbitrator in a matter of hours.

In case evaluation, a neutral evaluator gives an opinion on the strengths and weaknesses of each party’s evidence and arguments, and makes an evaluation of the case. Each party gets a chance to present the case and hear the other side. This may lead to a settlement, or at least help the parties prepare to resolve the dispute later on. Case evaluation, like mediation, can come early in the dispute and save time and money.

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com.

Only a small percentage of litigation cases in healthcare ever result in a court trial. The vast majority of healthcare related business legal disputes are settled out of court through agreement prior to any court intercession. Negotiations resulting in a settlement are less costly and take far less time than litigation, and are generally in the interests of all parties involved.

Unfortunately, the trend of healthcare business disputes is beginning to shift away from settlement, and more and more often, are winding up in costly and timely courtroom litigation. There are a couple reasons for this but a primary one stands out. Healthcare business dispute settlements have historically been sealed and kept private, but with the media now a 24-hour a day operation, this propensity has become virtually impossible to continue.

Subsequently, attorneys for the healthcare industry are becoming increasingly less likely to agree to settlement in the interest of the parties involved in a specific business dispute to avoid a new precedent from being set which encourages a snowball effect of new lawsuits, bogging down an already overwhelmed and financially strapped healthcare court system.

With the U.S. economy in shambles, society has become progressively more litigious, and an expectancy of litigation in a courtroom continues to permeate the anticipations of businesses involved in legal dispute. Ultimately, without reform of some kind, this trend will continue to spiral out of control, costing all the parties involved more time and more money.

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com.

A Santa Clarita, CA medical supply provider has paid $5 million to settle a lawsuit in which a whistleblower alleged the company overbilled Medi-Cal.

US attorney’s spokesman Thom Mrozek, basically calling the whole thing a bunch of crap, said, “Shield Healthcare was accused of submitting inflated bills to the state’s health insurance program for the poor on incontinence supplies.”

Medi-Cal relies on Shield as a major supplier of incontinence supplies, such as adult diapers and waterproof sheeting. Shield was accused of billing Medi-Cal more than double their net purchase price for supplies.

Shield is owned by Dharma Ventures Group. The settlement was paid Nov. 17.

The federal government gets $2 million of the settlement and the state of California gets $3 million.

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com.

According to EEOC charge statistics, complaints against employers increased from 75,428 in 2005 to 99,922 in 2010, an escalation of 32%. With the economy in a state of chaos, future tax rates a mystery, and employee healthcare costs skyrocketing, this should be no surprise. Businesses are being forced into drastic policy modifications minimizing pay rates, benefits, and the number of employees they can sustain on their payrolls.

With little to lose, employees are more willing than ever to take their chances with bias claims against their employers in an effort to secure their own financial positions. Inevitably, this has brewed into a perfect storm for an unprecedented level of lawsuits against businesses by their employees. No business is litigation proof, but there are a few steps all businesses can take to minimize the risk of litigation with employees, and abate potentially substantial financial loss.

First, it is important to make sure the business is properly incorporated to protect the owners or shareholders from personal liability resulting from business litigation. Second, the business must audit their payroll records to ensure all those working for them are afforded the correct employment status (full-time, part-time, independent contractor, etc…). Finally, businesses should assess their human resource policies and procedures for weaknesses in EEOC compliance and adjust accordingly to minimize the risk for potential business litigation.

The business climate in Arizona has been especially hard hit by this trend making it more important than ever for Arizona business owners to make sure they protect themselves from litigation in every way possible.

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com.

The economic climate in Arizona has seen an increase in the number of legal disputes breaking out in the healthcare industry. Inevitably, this has led to a substantial increase in the number of healthcare related litigation cases being heard in the Arizona court system.

If you’re in healthcare in Arizona, litigation is not necessarily inevitable, but it is certainly a possibility. All healthcare related businesses, no matter how well run, face the prospect of lawsuit. Every Arizona healthcare business should prepare for it, just as they prepare for any other contingency.

Arizona healthcare litigation is a complex area of law which arises from a variety of contractual and tort claims. These can include breach of contract, tortious interference with a contract, breach of fiduciary duty, infringement of intellectual property rights, unfair competition, fraud, or a host of other civil legal claims under Arizona healthcare law.

Often, when these types of healthcare disputes arise, the parties will attempt to use a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). These methods, including negotiations, mediation, and arbitration, are generally the best option for healthcare businesses in a dispute. On the other hand, healthcare businesses are also often unable to resolve their disputes through ADR proceedings, and these cases end up in an Arizona courtroom being resolved through litigation.

Scottsdale and Phoenix area healthcare businesses should protect their interests with the advice and counsel of an Arizona Healthcare Firm fully equipped to assist in preventing healthcare business related disputes from spiraling out of control.

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com.

If a healthcare provider in Arizona is being accused of breaching a contract by another party, it must be determined whether there are any defenses that call into question the validity of the contract. There are some defenses that make a contract unenforceable (void), and other defenses that give the parties the option to enforce the contract (voidable).

1)      Legality of the Contract: Although two persons may enter into a contractual agreement, if the subject matter of the contract is illegal, the contract is invalid and unenforceable.

2)      Capacity of the Parties: In order to be bound to a contract, the parties must be competent to enter into such a legal arrangement. Underage persons, persons who are mentally ill, and intoxicated persons are usually not held to the contracts they enter.

3)      Mistake, Duress, and Fraud:

a)      A mistake by both parties to a contract on an important issue makes the contract unenforceable.

b)      Duress is the use of physical force or mental pressure by one party to make the other party agree to the contract, which is ultimately unenforceable.

c)      Fraud is the intentional misrepresentation of an important issue of the contract which makes the contract voidable by the party upon whom the fraud was perpetrated.

4)      Unconscionability: A contract may be unenforceable if it is found by a court to be flagrantly unfair.

5)      Statute of Frauds: In many instances, contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally binding. However, a law known as the “statute of frauds” requires that some contracts must be written to be valid.

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com.

The fast pace and complex activities of health care organizations and providers presents a complex and unique set of legal issues that can seem like a daunting and insurmountable obstacle. Healthcare Law is a multi-faceted, comprehensive legal practice that encompasses numerous areas of practice expertise, including: contract law, employment law, insurance law, trust development, and provider defense and litigation.

The always changing industry of health care requires a law firm who is knowledgeable in the field and is committed to staying on top of the current avenues available to provide you with the best representation possible. The legal issues arising in this field are so numerous and pervasive the variety of legal practice areas requires representation from an expert firm who is familiar with how to integrate these issues into a coherent and successful resolution.

For healthcare organizations and providers, the question isn’t whether or not you should consult an attorney regarding your complex healthcare law needs, but what has stopped you from contacting one already. Hesitation only further opens cracks from all angles for potential legal liability.

In Scottsdale, Phoenix, and within Arizona, there is no more Professional Healthcare Law Firm than Hall & Chelle, LLC. With a proven track record, Hall & Chelle, LLC have distinguished themselves in the healthcare industry as the go-to firm for the gambit of issues including:

• Compliance
• Mediation and Arbitration
• Contract Disputes
• Medical Staff Relations
• Contract Review
• Physician Practices
• Disciplinary Matters
• Productivity Based Employment Agreements (RVU)
• Employment Agreements
• Professional Licensing
• Fraud and Abuse
• Recruitment
• Health Care Business Transactions
• Transactional Work
• Labor And Employment

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com.

According to a recent study by Thompson Reuters and HC Plexus, 65 percent of doctors believe the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), otherwise known as the Health Care Reform Act, or, “Obamacare,” will cause a decline in the quality of patient care.

Even more doctors, as many as 78 percent, believe their medical practices will be negatively impacted by the legislation. This pessimism may be the result of a lack of buy-in from doctors who in simpler times in our history were highly influential in discussing, debating and ultimately shaping health care policy.

Doctors are increasingly frustrated that their elected representatives, oftentimes lawyers, enact laws that affect health care policy, and every aspect of patient care, yet these elected officials generally lack any medical training. As a result, doctors view the law as creating obstacles to effective patient care, rather than a guide to quality patient care. Medical education, moreover, has not historically equipped students and residents with the tools necessary to become involved in the legislative process to effectuate meaningful change; but that trend is now changing.

Because health care law is an amalgam of many legal doctrines, numerous medical training facilities are now teaching medical students about the theories underlying basic legal education doctrine, such as constitutional law, contracts, torts, and property, all with an eye toward how these doctrines play out in medical research and their future medical practices.

Additionally, the medical students joined law students in learning about health law and bioethics and participating in realistic legal/medical, biotechnical and research-related scenarios, such as a clinical ethics consultation, an investigational review board meeting, an appellate argument, as well as a medical malpractice negotiation and mediation.

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com

An unpaid or disputed bill is more likely to wind up on your credit report because of a sea change in the way medical bills are treated.

“The reporting of medical debt (to credit bureaus) is becoming much more common,” said Travis Plunkett, a spokesman for the Consumer Federation of America. “Medical-debt reporting has become more professionalized.”

A decade ago, most hospitals did their own collections or assigned them to a collector who worked on contingency, collecting a portion of what was owed. Smaller providers typically handled collections in-house. Only the largest companies tended to report collections activity to the credit bureaus — and then only after repeated collection attempts had failed.

Today, physicians groups and other small providers are more likely to outsource their collections to agencies that use negative credit-report entries as a tool to urge patients to pay.

Meanwhile, an increasing number of for-profit hospitals and even some nonprofits regularly sell their bad debts for 2 or 3 cents on the dollar rather than try to collect the money themselves. Debt purchasers buy huge portfolios of debt, and one of the first things they do is post the collections on the consumers’ credit reports.

“Health-care-debt buying did not exist” 10 years ago, said Michael Klozotsky, an analyst for Kaulkin Ginsberg, which tracks debt-collection trends. In 2005, purchasers bought at least $3 billion of bad medical debts, and the market has been growing by 11% to 15% a year since.

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com.

With an independent contractor, a business is paying for a product or result. With an employee, a business is paying for the individual to do what is asked, whatever that might be. Where an employer’s control over an independent contractor is limited to the nature of the work, an employee is also instructed on the method, manner, and means by which they do it.

The healthcare industry is burgeoning by leaps and bounds, and with it, a variety of new employment contracts and terms ranging from full-time employment, hybrid contract employment, and outright independent contractors are emerging.

The control dynamic is the most fundamental difference between an employee and an independent contractor, and is also a common way in which businesses in the healthcare industry end up in trouble with workers they believe are independent contractors, but who might be deemed otherwise by a court due to over-reaching of the independent contractor relationship by the employer.

It is very important for healthcare providers to be cautious with supervision and control, especially where independent contractors are concerned. The mere fact that an independent contractor must provide a weekly progress report on how the home-care of a patient is going does not mean the individual is an employee. But if the report involves constant tweaking and redirecting of the effort, it might be ruled otherwise.

When evaluating workforce status, it is important to review what contracts and other documents say about reports, supervision, and the employment status in relation to level of supervision. The important inquiry is whether the business is exercising control over the method, manner, and means by which the worker is doing the job. If the answer is yes, this individual could be considered an employee regardless of the contractual agreement.

For more information on Healthcare Law in the Scottsdale and Phoenix areas as well as within Arizona, contact Hall & Chelle, LLC at (480) 422-4529, or email them at info@hall-chelle.com