Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued January 16, 2002 Decided June 20, 2002
Full case name: Rush Prudential HMO, Incorporated, Petitioner v. Debra C. Moran, et al. Citations: 536 U.S. 355; 122 S. Ct. 2151; 153 L. Ed. 2d 375; 2002 U.S. LEXIS 4644; 70 U.S.L.W. 4600; 27 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2921; 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 409 Prior history: On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Holding
Court membership
Chief Justice: William Rehnquist Associate Justices: John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
Majority by: Souter Joined by: Stevens, O'Connor, Ginsburg, Breyer Dissent by: Thomas Joined by: Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy
Laws applied
Illinois's Health Maintenance Organization Act

Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran, 536 U.S. 355 (2002)^[1], was a case in which the Supreme Court ruled. It decided that ERISA does not preempt the Illinois medical-review statute. The statute regulates insurance, which is one of the functions HMOs perform. Although HMOs provide healthcare as well as insurance, the statute does not require choosing a single or primary function of an HMO. Congress has long recognized that HMOs are risk-bearing organizations subject to state regulation. Finally, allowing States to regulate the insurance aspects of HMOs will not interfere with the desire of Congress for uniform national standards under ERISA.

[edit] References

1. ^ 536 U.S. 355 Full text of the opinion courtesy of Findlaw.com.