FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 351:1347-1352 September 23, 2004 Number 13 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Perspective by Bloche, M. G. Letters Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear PubMed Citation

On June 21, 2004, in the combined cases of Aetna Health Inc. v. Davila and CIGNA HealthCare of Texas Inc. v. Calad, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively immunized managed-care organizations (MCOs) from liability for negligent decisions about the care of patients in private employer-sponsored health plans.¹ It found that when MCOs decide to deny benefits, they are simply applying the terms of an insurance contract and are not making decisions regarding the care of patients, even when their decisions are based on a finding that the care is not medically necessary. The decision interprets the federal Employee Retirement . . . [Full Text of this Article]

The Davila and Calad Cases

The Supreme Court's Decision

Implications of the Decision

Conclusions

Source Information

From the Department of Health Law, Bioethics, and Human Rights, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston.

Related Letters:

The Supreme Court and Managed-Care Liability
Erb C. T., Rich R. F., Zinberg J. M., Mariner W. K., Bloche M. G.
Extract | Full Text | PDF  
N Engl J Med 2005; 352:201-203, Jan 13, 2005. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Erb, C. T., Rich, R. F., Zinberg, J. M., Mariner, W. K., Bloche, M. G. (2005). The Supreme Court and managed-care liability.. NEJM 352: 201-203 [Full Text]