Health Law Observer
Timely insights and legal commentary on various health care issues and developments surrounding regulations, employment, transactions and a range of key industry matters. This blog is maintained by the Health Care Department of Stevens & Lee.
New Jersey’s “Change of Ownership” (CHOW) requirements in health care transactions span a range of employment, employee benefits and notification obligations.
New Jersey’s “Change of Ownership” (CHOW) requirements in health care transactions span a range of employment, employee benefits and notification obligations.
Cross-market mergers have received increased attention among health care economists and lawyers and as of late have received the increased interest of the enforcement agencies.
Under certain parameters, professional and administrative services outside of those covered by Anti-Kickback Statute safe harbors can be provided for free to referring physicians.
If finalized, this non-compete ban would have a monumental impact on the health care industry, among numerous others.
The Proposed Rule focuses on strengthening protections for health care workers with conscience or religious freedom complaints without sacrificing access to a range of necessary services.
Cross-market mergers have received increased attention among health care economists and lawyers and as of late have received the increased interest of the enforcement agencies.
FDA guidance for veterinarians, state-licensed pharmacies and federal facilities regarding compounding animal pharmaceuticals will take effect April 2023.
FDA guidance for veterinarians, state-licensed pharmacies and federal facilities regarding compounding animal pharmaceuticals will take effect April 2023.
Cross-market mergers have received increased attention among health care economists and lawyers and as of late have received the increased interest of the enforcement agencies.
Proposed changes to Part 2 include updates to consent requirements, redisclosure permissions, patient rights, enforcement and others.
Following oral arguments in Axon v. FTC, numerous questions and comments by the Court indicate that it may ultimately side with the petitioners.
House Bill 1630 made permanent the relaxation of regulatory requirements regarding telehealth behavioral health services provided on an “audio-only” basis.
We examine numerous updates and changes regarding the No Surprises Act (NSA) and the subsequent compliance implications.
Health care providers and others in health care contemplating merger and other transactions subject to FTC review should be ready for significant implications arising from Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission.
For a number of reasons, the calendar is among most effective tools for advancing a transaction from “potential transaction” to a “closed transaction.”
New legislation is intended to help retain health care practitioners in the Commonwealth and maintain continuity of care.
President Biden has prioritized strengthening and expanding the Pediatric Mental Health Care Access Awards program, according to the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services.
Many of the steps are straightforward and expected, but it is important that you understand the commitment of time necessary to finally get that receipt from the NY Department of State that the entity is officially dissolved.
We examine COPA-like agreements in Pennsylvania where health systems seeking to merge as well as a COPA rules in neighboring states.
In the recently issued Policy Paper and based in part on the empirical evidence that it gathered, the FTC vigorously disputes the claimed justifications for COPAs.
The questions posed by the Agencies serve as a useful roadmap for hospital systems considering a merger and addressing the issue of pro-competitive benefits.
The FDA has recently made efforts to encourage more diversity and equity in clinical trials by releasing “Diversity Plans to Improve Enrollment of Participants from Underrepresented Racial and Ethnic Populations in Clinical Trials.”
Judge Jeremy Kernodle of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas decided to throw out another portion of the “No Surprise Act” in Lifenet, Inc., v. United States Department of Health and Human Services
Subscribe for Blog Updates