Nasir Pasha, Esq.

Court Says Cigna “Hijacked” Plan Administrator’s Role for Its Personal Benefit (Cigna v. Humble Surgical)

After over two years battling Cigna in its typical out-of-network fraud and fee-forgiveness protocol claims, Humble Surgical Hospital, LLC emerged victorious in a court judgement in the Southern District of Texas.

Judge Hoyt blasts Cigna’s Abuse of Discretion

Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt blasted Cigna in a 54-page opinion ordering the physician-owned out-of-network hospital to be paid over $13 million plus attorney’s fees. In applying the 5th Circuit’s 2015 opinion in North Cypress Medical Center v. Cigna, the Court made clear that Cigna’s interpretation of its infamous fee-forgiveness protocol plan exclusions is not only “legally incorrect” as North Cypress suggested, but also a complete abuse of discretion.  The judgement included

thumbnail of Humble Surgical Opinion and Order

Judge Hoyt Opinion and Order

Humble Surgical not “Fee-Forgiving”

Out-of-network facilities across the country have been faced with allegations that they are fee-forgiving by Cigna and other insurance carriers just because they have been unable to collect the full cost-sharing co-pay / deductible on or before the time of service. Anyone in the industry would understand the absurdity of such a standard that exists nowhere else, but has been reaffirmed and made clear by this trial-level district court case, as the court says “[f]ee-forgiving occurs only when a healthcare provider fails to attempt to collect co-pays, co-insurance or deductibles.

Cigna’s Cost-Containment Fees

The court interestingly pointed out that Cigna’s methodology  for claim processing in essence subverted the plan administrator’s role for its own “personal benefit.” Though the court only touched uponhow Cigna personally benefits from its “abuse of discretion,” it was at least a subtle rebuke to Cigna’s “cost-containment” fees that would purportedly award Cigna for paying nothing.

thumbnail of Cigna email

“paying nothing just smacks of a lack of genuine effort”

Cigna “Violated ERISA”

The judgement included $2.3 million in statutory penalties under ERISA. For those on the insurance side, do not feel bad, as there is little doubt that Cigna was unaware of the precarious application of its fee-forgiveness exclusion interpretation. In a 2008 red-flag waiving email from Cigna’s counsel to an internal appeals and medical director, Susan Morris, Esq. stated the she did not believe “paying nothing [to North Cypress Medical Center] is a viable option” and that “paying nothing just smacks of a lack of genuine effort to determine the proper charges and apply the correct plan benefits.” See Cigna’s Email from North Cypress.

Humble Surgical Opinion and Order Nuggets

The Humble Surgical decision is full of nuggets that have likely made Cigna’s counsel cringe in their consideration for an appeal. Here are some of the highlights of the opinion:

  • The Consequences of Scraping Data From A Competitor [e221]

    September 07, 2015

    The guys discuss the lawsuit filed by PhantomAlert against Waze concerning accusations of data scraping a database. Transcript: NASIR: All right. Welcome to our podcast where we cover business in the news and add our legal twist. …

  • How Much is My Business Worth?

    September 25, 2014

    You have spent a lot of time building your business, but about three to five years ago you began to think about selling, so you have been taking all the necessary steps to position it …

  • 6 Habits of Business Owners That Will Get Them Sued

    February 10, 2015

    There are some clients that I know, no matter what advice we give, no matter what we do, they are bound to enter into the courtroom. It is as if they are destined without any …

  • Nine Legal Strategies to Protect Your Brand

    June 25, 2015

    Perhaps you’re never dreamed of a Google or Facebook-sized business empire – multiple products generating multiple streams of income that seem to semi-magically renew themselves. Something a bit more modest might be fine as well. Whatever …

  • Erotic Data on Employee Smartphones: What Can an Employer Do?

    March 03, 2016

    The topic of teachers getting into trouble over sex-related matters has become almost a sub-genre of American journalism for several decades now. In the late 1990's, Washington schoolteacher Mary Kay Letourneau became a tabloid feature …

  • How to Protect Trade Secrets

    January 26, 2016

    Coca-Cola’s recipe for its soda is supposed to be one of the best kept secrets ever. The original recipe is said to be kept in a vault in the company’s Atlanta home where visitors to …

  • How Businesses Can Fight Back Against Negative Social Media [e246]

    January 11, 2016

    Nasir and Matt kick off 2016 by discussing how one Indianapolis bar responded to a negative post on its Facebook page. Transcript: NASIR: Welcome to our podcast where we cover business in the news and add our …

  • Product Liability 101 for Small Importers

    September 16, 2014

    Global sourcing has lots of exciting potential. The recent entry of onto the global stage along with others such as the FITA Buy/Sell Exchange, Euro Pages and Global Sources seems to presage a new …

  • Fox News Sexual Harassment Case Highlights the Need for Effective Sexual Harassment Policies and Procedures in the Workplace

    July 26, 2016

    Workplace sexual harassment has been grabbing headlines lately, thanks to charges filed by former “Fox & Friends” co-host Gretchen Carlson against Fox News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes. Carlson has alleged that Ailes fired her …

  • Must-Reads if You Are Thinking About Buying a Business

    September 18, 2014

    If you are thinking about buying a business, you must have lots of questions. Of course, you should get some help with this process -- from your banker, your attorney, your accountant, and possibly a …

  • …Cigna interfered with and frustrated the contractual relationship between the plan sponsors and the members/patients by imposing a methodology for claim processing that was not part of any plan.
  • In essence, Cigna “hijacked” the plan administrator’s role and subverted it for its personal benefit.
  • Indeed, Cigna’s unprecedented claims processing methodology and incessant related acts were extraordinary acts of bad faith.
  • …Cigna abused its discretion by obstinately denying Humble’s claims for benefits in spite of the medical services provided by it…
  • The Court is of the opinion that ERISA does not permit the interpretation embraced by Cigna.
  • Hence, Cigna’s “exclusionary” language interpretation does not pass muster under the “average plan participant” test.
  • Cigna’s interpretation of the “exclusionary” language as rejecting covered services, was improper and violative of the plans’ terms.
  • For these reasons, the Court determines that Cigna improperly applied the exclusionary language contained in the plans and, in the process, abused its discretion, especially since Cigna admittedly has never used the exclusionary language to reject covered services before and was relentless in engaging in an arbitrary manner with regard to Humble and its claims.
  • Cigna did not seriously consider the amounts of Humble’s claims even though the services were billed according to CPT Codes.
  • The Court finds that Cigna’s reliance on a proportionate share analysis for processing and paying Humble’s claim was not only improper but amounts to a breach of its fiduciary duty to the members/patients and Humble, as an assignee of such benefits.
  • Cigna’s method for processing Humble’s claims was simply disingenuous and arbitrary, as it was focused more on accomplishing a predetermined purpose–denying Humble’s claims.
  • Thus, Cigna breached its fiduciary duty when it strayed from the terms of the plans and interpreted its ASO Agreements with plan sponsors as conferring authority upon it that was not specifically set forth in and/or was contrary to the various plans.
  • Because Cigna failed to process Humble’s claims pursuant to the plans and ERISA, it also denied Humble a meaningful opportunity to appeal any claim denials and/or underpayments.
  • Humble was entitled to a fair review of its claims, both at the claim processing stage and, likewise, at the appellate review stage.
  • Therefore, the Court holds that Cigna’s claims processing procedure and appeals review process violated ERISA and concomitantly, its fiduciary duty of care and loyalty to the members/patients and the plan sponsors.
  • Indeed, Cigna earned handsome returns as a result of its aberrant and arbitrary claims processing methodology. The evidence establishes that it was subject to a double heaping from the plan sponsors’ pockets—first, in receiving a fee for claim processing services–and second, in receiving fees based on “savings,” regardless of how garnered.
  • In the process, however, Cigna forfeited its objectivity and violated its fiduciary duties of care and loyalty by making benefit determinations that did not consider UCR or conform to the plans’ terms in violation of ERISA.
  • Further, the Court concludes that Cigna has acted in bad faith with regard to processing Humble’s claims by failing and refusing to provide pertinent plan documents and related information.

This was a very bad decision for Cigna and the attorney’s for Humble Surgical Hospital are likely waiting for the 30 days from the June 15, 2016 order to receive a notice of appeal from Cigna. Stay tuned.

UPDATE: Cigna has filed a notice to appeal on June 23, 2016. It came with a healthy $19m appeal bond.



Read More