Foley v. Southwest Texas HMO, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that ERISA did not preempt the plaintiffs claims under Tex. Ins.Code Ann. Art. 20A.18B
• recognizing and overruling its previous, errant conclusion that the plaintiffs claims were premised on the existence of an assignment where an independent, separate and distinct cause of action existed against the HMO
• stating that “[n]othing in subsection (f) [of the Prompt Pay Statute] requires contractual privity between a physician and the HMO to exist before the physician may bring suit against the HMO for violating subsection (c)”
• claims for late payment of claims under the Texas Insurance Code and unjust enrichment
• “The plaintiffs’ actual ability to recover under the facts of this case as applied to the state law through which they attempt to recover is irrelevant to the issue of preemption.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).