Archive for the ‘Connecticut’ Category

CT State Health Care Reform Update

February 23, 2010 | Connecticut, Health Care Legislation | No Comments

Connecticut. Insurance regulators in the state have given three of the top five insurers approval to raise rates for 2010 by double-digit percentages. Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Health Net of Connecticut, and ConnectiCare asked for group health plan rate increases of 15.78%, 19.09%, and 14.5%, respectively, for 2010. According to the health insurers and the Connecticut Insurance Department, the increased premiums will keep premiums in line with medical costs. For more information, visit http://www.ct.gov/cid/site/default.asp.

Connecticut sues CVS for selling expired products

December 4, 2009 | Connecticut, News | No Comments

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Connecticut’s attorney general has sued CVS Caremark Corp, accusing the drugstore chain of selling food, beverages and over-the-counter medications

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said CVS sold expired items including antacids, baby formula, cough medicine, energy drinks and foods including eggs, milk and yogurt in 20 of 45 stores in the state that his office spot-checked this summer. Read more

Connecticut

November 13, 2009 | Connecticut, Health Care Legislation | No Comments

Connecticut sought to reduce every worker’s compensation subrogation claim for the injured employee’s attorney’s fees and necessary expenses.

Connecticut Seeks to Graft “Common Fund” Attorney Fee & Expense Reductions on Workers’ Compensation Recoveries

June 12, 2009 | Connecticut, Workers' Compensation | No Comments

NASP, www.subrogation.org

Connecticut has introduced a bill that would reduce every Workers’ Compensation subrogation claim for the injured employee’s attorney fees and necessary expenses. See Connecticut House Bill 6683 as amended. Connecticut’s law provides that the employer does get the first recovery dollar once a reduction for attorney fees is calculated when the employer joins as a party plaintiff in the litigation. If the employee sues, then the claim of the employer automatically gets reduced by one-third for attorney fees. The amended statute exempts the State, political subdivisions and the Second Injury Fund from any such attorney fee reduction. Connecticut law seeks to ensure employee attorneys recover their fees from the employer once a case is filed. This bill failed for now as the legislative session ended.

Connecticut Supreme Court Ruling on Workers’ Compensation Claims

October 16, 2008 | Connecticut | No Comments

A self-insured employer may seek reimbursement from a guaranty association for an insolvent insurer’s apportioned share of a worker’s compensation claim, according to a recent decision of the Connecticut Supreme Court. A worker sought comp benefits from his employer which was either self-insured for workers’ comp or was covered under policies issued by various carriers. Since one of these carriers had declared bankruptcy, any workers’ compensation claims made against it were being administered by the Connecticut Insurance Guaranty Association (CIGA). The employer asserted an apportionment claim against CIGA which contended that a self-insured employer may not obtain reimbursement for an insolvent carrier’s share of workers’ compensation benefits. The high court rejected this argument and held that a self-insured employer is entitled to seek reimbursement in accordance with Supreme Court precedent establishing that self-insured entities may assert claims against CIGA. Read more

Health Care Proposals for the States

June 13, 2008 | California, Connecticut, Kansas, Nebraska, Ohio, Pennsylvania | No Comments

California

The California Assembly Health Committee recently passed a series of bills that will mandate expansion of specific benefits and health services for insurers. Benefits and services include mental health coverage (AB1877), screening and diagnostic test for gynecological cancer (AB1774), HIV testing (AB1894), maternity health care (AB1962), and breast cancer screening (AB 2234).  Insurance plans opposing bills argue that e increasing costs of the proposed mandates would total an estimated $2.7 billion annually and that 85,000 Californians would lose health insurance coverage because of the consequential higher premium costs. Read more