Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 550 / Act 350 of 1980
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 550.1510 (2026)

Additional determinations by commissioner.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE NONPROFIT HEALTH CARE CORPORATION REFORM ACT


Act 350 of 1980


550.1510 Additional determinations by commissioner.

Sec. 510.

    (1) After considering the information and factors described in section 509(4), the goals of a health care corporation as provided in section 504, and the objectives contained in the provider class plan, the commissioner shall determined 1 of the following:

    (a) That the provider class plan achieves the goals of the corporation as provided in section 504.

    (b) That although the provider class plan does not substantially achieve 1 or more of the goals of the corporation, a change in the provider class plan is not required because there has been competent, material, and substantial information obtained or submitted to support a determination that the failure to achieve 1 or more of the goals was reasonable due to factors listed in section 509(4).

    (c) That a provider class plan does not substantially achieve 1 or more of the goals of the corporation as provided in section 504.

    (2) The commissioner shall notify the health care corporation, and each person who has requested a copy of such notice, of a determination under subsection (1) by certified or registered mail. Determinations made pursuant to subsection (1)(b) or (c) shall include a concise written statement of specific findings supporting that determination.

    (3) An existing provider contract or reimbursement arrangement shall remain in effect until a new provider class plan has been retained and placed into effect as provided in section 506(4). A provider class plan shall not be subject to further review until the expiration of the time period provided in section 509(1).

    (4) A provider class plan with respect to which a determination was made under subsection (1)(a) or (b) shall not be subject to further review until the expiration of 2 years following the determination.

History: 1980, Act 350, Eff. Apr. 3, 1981

Compiler's Notes:

    Near the end of subsection (1), “determined” evidently should read “determine.”

PopularName Notes:

Blue Cross-Blue Shield

PopularName Notes:

Act 350
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1994–2006 · leading case: PT Today, Inc. v. Comm'r of the Off. of Fin. & Ins. Servs., 715 N.W.2d 398 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
PT Today, Inc. v. Comm'r of the Off. of Fin. & Ins. Servs., 715 N.W.2d 398 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “1509(1)] and [MCL 550.1510(1)]. (b) Determining, based on the information and factors described in [MCL 550.”
In re 1987-88 Med. Doctor Provider Class Plan, 514 N.W.2d 471 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 3× “The iho reversed the August 16, 1990, determination of the Insurance Commissioner (ic), MCL 550.1510; MSA 24.660(510), and ordered appellant Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Michigan (bcbsm) to transmit to the iho a remedial plan for determination by the iho whether the remedial…”
Genesis Ctr., PLC v. Comm'r of Fin. & Ins. Servs., 633 N.W.2d 834 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “If defendant finds that the provider plan is inadequate, MCL 550.1510(1)(c), as in the present case, the health corporation must transmit a remedial plan within six months 6 that “substantially achieves the goals, achieves the objectives, and substantially overcomes the…”
Mich. Physical Therapy Ass'n, Inc. v. Comm'r of Ins., 675 N.W.2d 37 (Mich. 2004). “See MCL 550.1510(1)(b). This determination was apparently within the IHO's authority.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 550.1510(1) — 2 cases
PT Today, Inc. v. Comm'r of the Off. of Fin. & Ins. Servs., 715 N.W.2d 398 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “1509(1)] and [MCL 550.1510(1)]. (b) Determining, based on the information and factors described in [MCL 550.”
In re 1987-88 Med. Doctor Provider Class Plan, 514 N.W.2d 471 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). “The iho reversed the August 16, 1990, determination of the Insurance Commissioner (ic), MCL 550.1510; MSA 24.660(510), and ordered appellant Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Michigan (bcbsm) to transmit to the iho a remedial plan for determination by the iho whether the remedial…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 550.1510(1)(b) — 1 case
Mich. Physical Therapy Ass'n, Inc. v. Comm'r of Ins., 675 N.W.2d 37 (Mich. 2004). “See MCL 550.1510(1)(b). This determination was apparently within the IHO's authority.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 550.1510(1)(c) — 1 case
Genesis Ctr., PLC v. Comm'r of Fin. & Ins. Servs., 633 N.W.2d 834 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “If defendant finds that the provider plan is inadequate, MCL 550.1510(1)(c), as in the present case, the health corporation must transmit a remedial plan within six months 6 that “substantially achieves the goals, achieves the objectives, and substantially overcomes the…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 550.1510(l)(a) — 2 cases
PT Today, Inc. v. Comm'r of the Off. of Fin. & Ins. Servs., 715 N.W.2d 398 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “1509(1)] and [MCL 550.1510(1)]. (b) Determining, based on the information and factors described in [MCL 550.”
In re 1987-88 Med. Doctor Provider Class Plan, 514 N.W.2d 471 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). “The iho reversed the August 16, 1990, determination of the Insurance Commissioner (ic), MCL 550.1510; MSA 24.660(510), and ordered appellant Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Michigan (bcbsm) to transmit to the iho a remedial plan for determination by the iho whether the remedial…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 550.1510(l)(b) — 1 case
PT Today, Inc. v. Comm'r of the Off. of Fin. & Ins. Servs., 715 N.W.2d 398 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “1509(1)] and [MCL 550.1510(1)]. (b) Determining, based on the information and factors described in [MCL 550.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 550.1510(l)(c) — 1 case
PT Today, Inc. v. Comm'r of the Off. of Fin. & Ins. Servs., 715 N.W.2d 398 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “1509(1)] and [MCL 550.1510(1)]. (b) Determining, based on the information and factors described in [MCL 550.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.