Integrity Health Administrators Moves to Block Subopena in Bill Repricing Dispute

On Monday, a motion to quash a subpoena was filed in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, by Integrity Health Administrators, who are third parties to an action which was originally was filed in the Southern District of Florida. The motion to quash regards to a subpoena that Integrity considers to be unduly burdensome and lacking in jurisdiction.

The original case was filed by the South Broward Hospital District against ELAP Services, a medical bill repricing company, and Group & Pension Administrators, a third party administrator for employer insurance.

The case concerned insurance plans, which do not have contractual arrangements with the plaintiff, that seek repricing of the plaintiff’s bills by ELAP Services. The insurance companies would then pay these bills at the lower rate that had not been agreed to by the hospital under a theory that the lower payment amount represented a usual and customary rate for bills of that type in the jurisdiction. They claim that the hospital was required to abide by these lower payment amounts.

The subpoena was issued to Integrity Health Plans in search of spreadsheets showing all pricing that Integrity has provided historically nationwide. The plaintiff notes that the case has not been certified for a class action status, so it is currently bound by the geographic rules for subpoenas, which both Integrity entities are outside of. Integrity also notes that Integrity Health Administrators is not an active business and has never been since its formation. Integrity Health LLC , the movants say, is a health plan manager and has provided consulting work to connect third party administrators with health plans, but has never acted as a third party administrator itself, disputing that it is involved with either of the defendants involved in the subpoena. Finally, the information requested would require the creation of the charts in a format that they do not currently exist in, is vastly unrelated to the issues in suit, and also unduly burdensome, the motion argues.

The movant seeks to quash the subpoena and discovery sanctions to cover costs of the motion and as penalties for the lack of review by the plaintiffs. The movant is represented by the Devine Timoney Law Group.