Steve Bruzonsky - Arizona\'s get well, get on with life attorney Peer Review Rated Steve Bruzonsky - Arizona\'s get well, get on with life attorney






Steven J. Bruzonsky

Attorney At Law

Law Office of
Steven J. Bruzonsky
917 E. San Angelo Ave.
Gilbert, AZ 85234
480-969-3003

Call 480-969-3003

 

Please note that Attorney Bruzonsky has been doing this regular “Liens Corner” column since April 2006. His last “Liens Corner” article was for the November/December 2017 issue of The Advocate, having stepped down from this regular column, as he now works part-time (and is part-time retired) exclusively handling large subrogation/lien claims in very large personal injury and medical malpractice cases for other attorneys. However, attorney Bruzonsky may add notes to this website under the subject lien article headers from time to time. (Please keep in mind that this site contains general information for educational purposes only. It is not intended to provide legal advise, which can only come from a qualified attorney who is familiair with all the facts and circumstances of your specific case and relevant law.) 

 

 

2016-07/08: Div. One Reverses Itself, FEHBA Liens Lawful & Enforceable

June 25th, 2016 12:02:35 pm


This article has been published in “The Advocate”, a monthly publication of the Arizona Association for Justice/Arizona Trial Lawyers Association, July-August 2016 issue, @2016 by Steven J. Bruzonsky, Esq.

 

 

July/August 2016 Lien Updates

 

Abbott v. Banner Health Network– The Arizona Supreme Court Issues Its Decision in This AHCCCS Hospital Balance Billing Controversy:

 

Division One, Arizona Court of Appeals, has issued its opinion, Kobold v Aetna, No. 1 CA-CV 12-0315 (3-31-2016), reconsidering whether or not FEHBA liens are legally enforceable in Arizona (as required by the U.S. Supreme Court), and has decided that Arizona anti-subrogation caselaw is preempted by federal law and the FEHBA, and thus FEHBA liens are legally enforceable in Arizona. Division One states therein:  “In Kobold v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 233 Ariz. 100 (App. 2013) ("Kobold I"), we held that 5 U.S.C. § 8902(m)(1) of the Federal Employee Health Benefits Act ("FEHBA") did not preempt Arizona law forbidding subrogation in personal injury cases. After the Arizona Supreme Court denied review, the Office of Personnel Management ("OPM") promulgated new regulations, set forth in 5 C.F.R. § 890.106, that construe § 8902(m)(1) to include subrogation and reimbursement terms in FEHBA contracts. In light of the new regulations, the United States Supreme Court vacated our opinion and remanded the case for reconsideration of the preemptive effect of the FEHBA. Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Kobold, 135 S. Ct. 2886 (2015).1 We hold that the statutory interpretation embodied in the new federal regulations is entitled to deference in accordance with Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), and, accordingly, we are bound to interpret the FEHBA as preempting Arizona anti-subrogation law. We therefore reverse the superior court's entry of summary judgment for Kobold, and remand with instructions to grant Aetna's cross-motion for summary judgment.”  Kobold’s attorneys advise that they are appealing this first to the Arizona Supreme Court, and then to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary. 



Return to Articles

© Copyright 2006, Steven J. Bruzonsky, Attorney
Terms of Use: This site contains general information for educational purposes only. It is not intended to provide legal advise, which can only come from a qualified attorney who is familiar with all the facts and circumstances of your specific case and relevant law. If you use this site, or send information or e-mail the attorney, such action does not create an attorney-client relationship. For legal advise please personally consult with an experienced attorney like Steven J. Bruzonsky.