Michigan Federal Court Rejects Saginaw Chippewa Claims in Suit against Insurance Company over Medicare-Like Rates

Here are new materials in Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (E.D. Mich.):

306 BCBS Brief

308 SCIT Brief

310 BCBS Reply

317 DCT Order

This is a lengthy case, so here is the case tag (link to all the posts).

Michigan Federal Court Asks Parties to Focus on Merits Rather than Discovery Squabbles in Tribes Suit against Insurance Company over Medicare-Like Rates

Here are new materials in Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (E.D. Mich.):

295 SCIT Third Motion for Default Judgment

297 BCBS Response to 295

298 SCIT Reply ISO 295

299 BCBS Motion for Sanctions

302 SCIT Response to 299

303 BCBS Reply ISO 299

304 DCT Order

Most recent post here.

Sixth Circuit (again) Rules in Favor of Saginaw Chippewa in Beef with Blue Cross

Here is the opinion in Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.

An excerpt:

The Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe and its Benefit Plan brought federal and common law claims against Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM or Blue Cross) for failing to fulfill its fiduciary duties in administering tribal health insurance plans. When we first encountered this dispute three years ago, we reversed the district court’s dismissal of the Tribe’s claims based on Blue Cross’s alleged failure to insist on “Medicare-like rates” for care authorized by the Tribe’s Contract Health Services1 program and provided to tribal members by Medicare-participating hospitals. On remand, the district court granted summary judgment to Blue Cross, concluding that the Tribe’s payments for qualified CHS care through the Blue Cross plans were not eligible for Medicare-like rates. The district court interpreted the relevant federal regulations as limiting the requirement of Medicare-like rates to payments for care that was authorized by CHS, provided to tribal members by Medicare- participating hospitals, and directly paid for with CHS funds. Based on the plain wording of the applicable regulations, we REVERSE and REMAND the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Briefs:

Lower court materials here.