| Click the button below to search for articles... View News Items from prior months... December 2018 February 2017 December 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 March 2016 February 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 May 2014 March 2014 February 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 June 2012 May 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 | SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF HB 4612 (H-3) By: George T. Sinas CPAN General Counsel Sinas Dramis Law Firm May 22, 2014 On Thursday, February 20, 2014, HB 4612 (H-3) was offered as a substitute to H-1, which has been stalled on the floor of the Michigan House for almost one year. Like H-1, H-3 imposes unprecedented limitations on medical benefits and significantly restricts what treatment and services are available to persons injured in motor vehicle accidents. The analysis set forth below, focuses on specific limitations placed on medical care; insurance company control of medical treatment; the protection of insurance companies who engage in unfair practices; and the inadequate attempts to address the affordability issue. In addition, many of the features contained in H-3 were contained in Proposal C, a referendum which was resoundingly defeated by Michigan voters in 1994. Those Proposal C concepts are identified below with an asterisk. The highlights of H-3 are as follows:Enter body here... Published: 08/13/14 |
