Perspective
Apr. 29, 2016
Lien satisfaction isn't a condition precedent to settlement payments
If settlement proceeds are not used to reimburse Medicare, counsel who have held the settlement funds, as well as the insurance company that paid them, may be liable to Medicare if the lien is not paid. By Steven H. Kruis
Steven H. Kruis
ADR Services, Inc.Email: skruis@adrservices.org
Steven has been a full-time mediator since 2002, and mediated well over 2,000 matters throughout Southern California. He is with the San Diego Office of ADR Services.
Under federal law, Medicare's "super lien" attaches to any settlement payment to a plaintiff for an injury that Medicare paid to treat. If the settlement proceeds are not used to reimburse Medicare, counsel who have held the settlement funds, as well as the insurance company that paid them, may be liable to Medicare if the lien is not paid. It is no defense that the insurance company has already reimbursed the plaintiff. In fact...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In