Strategic Briefing Wins in Affordable Care Act Litigation

In a case brought by a dialysis provider against an insurance company and multiple employers, Gass Turek attorney Tamar Kelber used early motion practice to bring the case to a successful conclusion. The plaintiff sought early resolution through summary judgment of issues involving the interpretation of the Affordable Care Act. Gass Turek brought its own motion for summary judgment and negotiated a concurrent briefing schedule with plaintiff’s motion. This required the plaintiff to offensively stake out the details of its interpretation of the Affordable Care Act, without the benefit of the defendants’ summary judgment arguments, and resulted in an opinion resolving both motions in a split decision with language favorable to the defense. The plaintiff then moved to reconsider the court’s ruling, challenging the standard the court had used to assess compliance with the ACA. Instead of filing its own motion for reconsideration, the defense used its response to support the court’s reasoning and Tamar argued that any reconsideration should be in her client’s favor. The court was persuaded and denied the relief the plaintiff sought, reconsidered its ruling and granted summary judgment for the defense on all significant issues.

Related Gass Turek Attorneys