236 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10176856)
21. Time for reckoning ... Wall Street wasn't interested in healthcare because it had not yet become big business.
Hage SJ
Radiol Manage; 1998; 20(6):25-6. PubMed ID: 10338851
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. ERISA preemption defenses rejected. Nealy v. US Healthcare HMO.
Hosp Law Newsl; 2000 Jan; 17(3):4-6. PubMed ID: 10724626
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Preemption of a state "legislatively created" right to sue HMOs for negligence. Corporate Health Ins. Inc. v. Texas Dept. of Insurance.
Jordan KA
Health Care Law Mon; 1999 Apr; ():13-24. PubMed ID: 10351769
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. HMO liability.
Adams A
Tex Med; 2000 May; 96(5):28-32. PubMed ID: 10843010
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Closing the loophole.
Maldonado M
Tex Med; 1999 Jul; 95(7):46-9. PubMed ID: 10434766
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. New threat to HMOs. Bill to amend ERISA would allow patients to sue.
Gardner J
Mod Healthc; 1998 Jan; 28(4):38. PubMed ID: 10175941
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. The changing world of HMO liability under ERISA.
McAuliffe BE
J Leg Med; 2001 Mar; 22(1):77-106. PubMed ID: 11330125
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. In their laps.
Borges W
Tex Med; 2004 Jan; 100(1):39-42. PubMed ID: 15146770
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Breach of fiduciary duty.
Feldman GE
Cost Qual; 2000 Mar; 6(1):31-40. PubMed ID: 10788217
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. High court rules ERISA pre-empts negligence claims against HMOs.
Sfikas PM
J Am Dent Assoc; 2004 Oct; 135(10):1480-2. PubMed ID: 15551991
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Aetna Health, Inc. v. Davila: Implications for public health policy.
Rosenbaum S; Teitelbaum J
Public Health Rep; 2004; 119(5):510-2. PubMed ID: 15313115
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. The final chapter (maybe) of preemption of HMO accountability under state law.
Jordan K
Health Care Law Mon; 2004 Feb; ():15-27. PubMed ID: 14989070
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. The cost of negligence.
Sullivan G
Case Manager; 2006; 17(2):54-5, 66. PubMed ID: 16628861
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Doctors, HMOs, ERISA, and the public interest after Pegram v. Hendrich.
Stempel JW; von Magdenko N
Tort Insur Law J; 2001; 36(3):687-734. PubMed ID: 11939225
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Will Fifth Circuit's decision spur action on patient rights?
Levin-Epstein M
Manag Care; 2000 Aug; 9(8):14-5. PubMed ID: 11186509
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Litigating around ERISA to quality managed healthcare: an HMO can breach fiduciary duties.
Karns JE
Spec Law Dig Health Care Law; 2001 Mar; (263):9-30. PubMed ID: 11291401
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Will ERISA law become a sword instead of a shield?
Capitation Manag Rep; 1997 Aug; 4(8):129-31. PubMed ID: 10175789
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Second Circuit permits state malpractice suit against HMO.
Lumelsky A
J Law Med Ethics; 2003; 31(4):734-6. PubMed ID: 14968678
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Law & psychiatry: Pegram v. Herdrich: the Supreme Court passes the buck on managed care.
Appelbaum PS
Psychiatr Serv; 2000 Oct; 51(10):1225-6, 1238. PubMed ID: 11013317
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Patient bill of rights 2001.
Benjamin GC
Physician Exec; 2001; 27(3):75-7. PubMed ID: 11387902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
