United Healthcare 2008 Annual Report Download - page 100

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 100 of the 2008 United Healthcare annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 132

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 112
  • 113
  • 114
  • 115
  • 116
  • 117
  • 118
  • 119
  • 120
  • 121
  • 122
  • 123
  • 124
  • 125
  • 126
  • 127
  • 128
  • 129
  • 130
  • 131
  • 132

UNITEDHEALTH GROUP
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
distracting from the conduct of the Company’s business. The adverse resolution of any specific lawsuit or any
potential regulatory proceeding or action could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business,
financial condition and results of operations.
Other adjustments for non-operating cash charges may be required in connection with the resolution of stock
option-related matters arising under litigation and regulatory reviews by the SEC, IRS, U.S. Attorney, U.S.
Congressional committees and Minnesota Attorney General, the amount and timing of which are uncertain but
which could be material.
Other Legal Matters
Because of the nature of its businesses, the Company is frequently made party to a variety of legal actions related
to the design and management of its service offerings. The Company records liabilities for its estimates of
probable costs resulting from these matters. These matters include, but are not limited to, claims relating to
health care benefits coverage, medical malpractice actions, contract disputes and claims related to disclosure of
certain business practices.
MDL Litigation. Beginning in 1999, a series of class action lawsuits were filed against the Company by health
care providers alleging various claims relating to the Company’s reimbursement practices, including alleged
violations of the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) and state prompt payment laws and
breach of contract claims. Many of these lawsuits were consolidated in a multi-district litigation in the United
States District Court for the Southern District Court of Florida (MDL). In the lead MDL lawsuit, the court
certified a class of health care providers for certain of the RICO claims. In 2006, the trial court dismissed all of
the claims against the Company in the lead MDL lawsuit, and the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals later
affirmed that dismissal, leaving eleven related lawsuits that had been stayed during the litigation of the lead MDL
lawsuit. In August 2008, the trial court, applying its rulings in the lead MDL lawsuit, dismissed seven of the 11
related lawsuits, and all but one claim in an eighth lawsuit. The plaintiffs have appealed these dismissals to the
Eleventh Circuit. The trial court ordered the final claim in the eighth lawsuit to arbitration. In December 2008, at
the plaintiffs’ request, the trial court dismissed without prejudice one of the three remaining lawsuits. In late
2008, a federal magistrate judge recommended that the trial court deny the plaintiffs’ motions to remand to state
court the remaining two lawsuits. On January 23, 2009, the trial court adopted this recommendation with respect
to one of the lawsuits. The trial court has not yet issued an order with respect to the final lawsuit. In addition, the
Company is party to a number of arbitrations in various jurisdictions involving similar claims. The Company is
vigorously defending against the remaining claims in these cases.
AMA Litigation. On March 15, 2000, a group of plaintiffs including the American Medical Association (AMA)
filed a lawsuit against the Company in state court in New York, which was removed to federal court. The
complaint and subsequent amended complaints asserted antitrust claims and claims based on ERISA, as well as
breach of contract and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, deceptive acts and practices, and trade
libel in connection with the calculation of reasonable and customary reimbursement rates for non-network health
care providers by the Company’s affiliates. On January 14, 2009, after almost nine years of litigation and many
rulings from the court on various motions, the parties announced an agreement to settle the lawsuit, along with a
similar case filed in 2008 in federal court in New Jersey. Under the terms of the proposed settlement, the
Company and its affiliated entities will be released from claims relating to their out-of-network reimbursement
policies from March 15, 1994 through the date of final court approval of the settlement. The Company will pay a
total of $350 million to fund the settlement for health plan members and out-of-network providers in connection
with out-of-network procedures performed since March 15, 1994. The agreement contains no admission of
wrongdoing. The proposed settlement is subject to preliminary and final court approval. In addition, the
90