The court battle that erupted between two Pennsylvania healthcare leviathans -- Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and Independence Blue Cross -- could prove to be a short one if a federal judge adopts IBC's arguments and tosses the case out. CHOP claims its contract with IBC has "expired" and it should now be paid 100 percent of its charges instead of the 44 percent reimbursement rate it agreed to under the contract. But IBC's lawyers argue CHOP had no right to go to court in the first place.
January 13, 2000 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
The court battle that recently erupted between two healthcare leviathans — Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Independence Blue Cross — could prove to be a short one if a federal judge adopts IBC’s arguments and tosses the case out.
CHOP claims in the suit that its contract with IBC has “expired” and that it should now be paid 100 percent of its charges instead of the 44 percent reimbursement rate it agreed to in June 1996.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
