42 U.S.C. § 11131

Requiring reports on medical malpractice payments

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In general

Each entity (including an insurance company) which makes payment under a policy of insurance, self-insurance, or otherwise in settlement (or partial settlement) of, or in satisfaction of a judgment in, a medical malpractice action or claim shall report, in accordance with section 11134 of this title, information respecting the payment and circumstances thereof.

(b) Information to be reportedThe information to be reported under subsection (a) includes—(1) the name of any physician or licensed health care practitioner for whose benefit the payment is made,(2) the amount of the payment,(3) the name (if known) of any hospital with which the physician or practitioner is affiliated or associated,(4) a description of the acts or omissions and injuries or illnesses upon which the action or claim was based, and(5) such other information as the Secretary determines is required for appropriate interpretation of information reported under this section.(c) Sanctions for failure to report

Any entity that fails to report information on a payment required to be reported under this section shall be subject to a civil money penalty of not more than $10,000 for each such payment involved. Such penalty shall be imposed and collected in the same manner as civil money penalties under subsection (a) of section 1320a–7a of this title are imposed and collected under that section.

(d) Report on treatment of small payments

The Secretary shall study and report to Congress, not later than two years after November 14, 1986, on whether information respecting small payments should continue to be required to be reported under subsection (a) and whether information respecting all claims made concerning a medical malpractice action should be required to be reported under such subsection.

(Pub. L. 99–660, title IV, § 421, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3788.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 35 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: Abcarian v. McDonald, 617 F.3d 931 (7th Cir. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Abcarian v. McDonald, 617 F.3d 931 (7th Cir. 2010). · cites it 3× “See 42 U.S.C. § 11131 (a) (requiring any entity making a payment in settlement of a medical malpractice claim to report certain information to the NPDB); 225 ILCS 60/23(A)(3) (requiring any entity which indemnifies a physician for his professional liability to report the…”

Ashraf v. Adventist Health Sys./Sunbelt, Inc., 322 F. Supp. 3d 879 (W.D. Tenn. 2018). “) The NPDB maintains an informational data base about healthcare providers pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 11131 , et. seq. ("the Act").”

Doe v. Rodgers, M.H.A., 139 F. Supp. 3d 120 (D.D.C. 2015). · cites it 2× “In addition, on its face, the Act advances nonpunitive legislative goals, which arc discussed supra part B(3) and elsewhere in this decision. Because the Health Care Quality Improvement Act does not inflict punishment of any sort sufficient to he deemed a bill of attainder, the…”

Robinson v. E. Carolina Univ., 329 F. Supp. 3d 156 (E.D.N.C. 2018). · cites it 2× “" 42 U.S.C. § 11131 (a) & (b)(1)-(5) ; see also 45 C.”

Paradigm Ins. v. Langerman Law Offices, P.A., 24 P.3d 593 (Ariz. 2001). “See 42 U.S.C. § 11131 ; see also 1 Geoffrey C.”

Mir v. Charter Suburban Hosp., 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6767 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “( 42 U.S.C. § 11131 et seq.) Thus, when actions are taken against a health care provider based on findings which are not even supported by substantial evidence, the results can be grossly unfortunate for that provider.”

Nieto v. State, 952 P.2d 834 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “1997 (optometrists); see also 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 11131 & 11151 (1995)(requiring that payments made in settlement or satisfaction of a judgment in a medical malpractice action or claim be reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank, with the information available if a physician…”

Philips v. Pitt Cnty. Mem'l Hosp. Inc., 731 S.E.2d 462 (N.C. Ct. App. 2012). “A hospital complying with this requirement cannot be “held liable in any civil action with respect to any report made under [ 42 U.S.C. §§ 11131 et seq.] ... without knowledge of the falsity of the information contained in the report.”

Patrick v. Floyd Med. Ctr., 565 S.E.2d 491 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002). “Under the national reporting system, insurance companies are required to report medical malpractice payments to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 42 USC § 11131 ; boards of medical examiners are required to report sanctions imposed against physicians, 42 USC § 11132 ;…”

Tucker v. United States, 143 F. Supp. 2d 619 (S.D.W. Va 2001). “42 U.S.C. §§ 11131 (a), 11134(b) and 11137(b)(1).”

Levine v. Rosen, 616 A.2d 623 (Pa. 1992). “42 U.S.C.A. § 11131 (b). Dr. Rosen’s assertion that the irrelevant considerations charge must be supplemented with an instruction on the federal reporting requirement under the Act is erroneous.”

Doe v. South Carolina Med. Malpractice Liab. Jt. Underwriting Ass'n, 557 S.E.2d 670 (S.C. 2001). “See 42 U.S.C. § 11131 (West 1995). The report provided Doe with an opportunity to recount his version of the underlying incident.”

Show all 35 citing cases →

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.