These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12420399)

  • 1. High court upholds independent physician reviews under state law.
    Drenning MG
    Health Care Law Mon; 2002 Jul; ():3-9. PubMed ID: 12420399
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Independent review of HMO decisions: The Supreme Court hears oral argument in Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran.
    Drenning MG
    Health Care Law Mon; 2002 Feb; ():3-5. PubMed ID: 12436733
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Supreme Court rejects preemption in ERISA benefits dispute. Rush Prudential, Inc. v. Moran.
    Morreim EH
    Hosp Law Newsl; 2002 Nov; 20(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 12412312
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Supreme Court upholds Illinois law requiring independent review of some HMO coverage decisions.
    Sfikas PM
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2002 Aug; 133(8):1117-9. PubMed ID: 12198993
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Supreme Court deals another blow to managed care industry. Kentucky Ass'n of Health Plans v. Miller.
    Hosp Law Newsl; 2003 Jul; 20(9):1-3. PubMed ID: 12833717
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Which rules-state law or ERISA? Patients' rights case before high court could have big impact on HMO enrollees.
    Benko LB
    Mod Healthc; 2002 Jan; 32(3):16. PubMed ID: 11840846
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. ERISA preemption conflict in the Third Circuit.
    Cassidy MA
    Health Care Law Mon; 2002 Dec; ():8-11. PubMed ID: 12596431
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The impact of the recent Supreme Court rulings in Pegram and Rush Prudential on state regulation of managed care organizations.
    Trueman DL
    J Health Law; 2003; 36(1):107-32. PubMed ID: 12784923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. HMOS--independent medical review--preemption. Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran.
    Benefits Q; 2003; 19(2):96-8. PubMed ID: 12827843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Supreme court upholds state independent review laws: does this help or hinder health plans?
    Bloom A
    Manag Care Interface; 2002 Sep; 15(9):56-7, 61. PubMed ID: 12244651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Supreme Court clarifies the breadth of ERISA preemption.
    Hershey N
    Hosp Law Newsl; 2004 Oct; 21(12):1-7. PubMed ID: 15495741
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Supreme Court to decide whether ERISA pre-empts negligence claims against HMOs.
    Sfikas PM
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2004 Jan; 135(1):110-2. PubMed ID: 14959884
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The ERISA roadblock.
    Borges W
    Tex Med; 2004 Aug; 100(8):31-3. PubMed ID: 15386976
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. ERISA preemption remains on the front burner.
    Hosp Law Newsl; 2004 Mar; 21(5):1-6. PubMed ID: 15011608
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Kentucky Association of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller.
    Gutmann V
    J Law Med Ethics; 2003; 31(4):729-31. PubMed ID: 14968676
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Should your ERISA remedy depend upon your geography?: an analysis of Rush Prudential HMO, INC. v. Moran.
    Schulz AM
    J Contemp Health Law Policy; 2003; 19(2):553-71. PubMed ID: 14748257
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Preemption--HMOs--independent physician review of medical necessity. Moran v. Rush Prudential HMO, Inc., 230 F.3d 959 (7th Cir. 2000), cert. granted,--U.S.--150 L.Ed.2d 749 (2001).
    Benefits Q; 2002; 18(4):70-2. PubMed ID: 12407899
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.