Too big to stop? Obama's overhaul lumbers on
Legal Events
Most insurers, hospital executives and state officials expect they'll keep carrying out President Barack Obama's health care overhaul even after a federal judge cast its fate in doubt by declaring all of it unconstitutional.
"It's still the law of the land," said William Hoagland, vice president for public policy at health insurer Cigna. "We'll continue to proceed with its requirements, and (the ruling) will not slow that down. We have no other choice until this thing is resolved one way or the other." Insurers spent millions to block passage of the law.
Health care accounts for about one-sixth of the economy, and many players in the sprawling sector have a love-hate relationship with Obama's health care remake. There's dissatisfaction with key provisions, and a sense that parts may be unworkable. But at the same time, it's seen as a vehicle to start addressing problems of cost and quality that, left to fester, could trigger more drastic consequences.
"I don't think people are going to hit the stop button," said Paul Keckley, executive director of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, a research arm of the consulting firm. "You probably don't make the big bets right now, but you make the incremental investments in case you have to make the big bets 6 or 12 or 18 months down the road. Everyone proceeds with an informed approach."
Monday's ruling by U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson in Florida had been expected to go against the Obama administration. But the scope of the decision in a lawsuit by 26 of the 50 states took some by surprise.
Vinson struck down the entire law after finding its requirement for nearly all Americans to carry health insurance unconstitutional. Another judge who reached the same conclusion in a separate case voided the individual insurance requirement and left everything else in place.
Related listings
-
UW Madison's patenting arm wins lawsuit
Legal Events 01/05/2010The University of Wisconsin-Madison's patenting arm has won an appeal in federal court against Canadian drug company Xenon. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday in favor of the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation. The lawsuit dealt with ho...
-
Lawsuit: Botched Diagnosis Led to 30-Year-Old New York Teacher's Brain Hemorrhage Death
Legal Events 11/23/2009Page rank5Doctors at a Long Island hospital failed to properly diagnose a 30-year-old Queens teacher's head pain in the days leading up to her death from a brain hemorrhage, a lawsuit alleges. Melissa Fudge, who taught at PS 16 in Corona, died a year...
-
Microsoft Lawsuit Shows Malicious Advertising a Growing Issue
Legal Events 09/21/2009Microsoft announced on Sept. 18 that it has filed lawsuits against five entities that it claims have been spreading "malvertising," or online advertising used to port malware onto end users' machines. Microsoft is asking the court to shut down those ...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.