<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>National Senior Citizens Law Center &#187; Health Care Litigation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/category/health-care/health-care-litigation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.nsclc.org</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2013 00:32:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>NSCLC/NCPSSM Provide Analysis of Supreme Court Ruling on ACA</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nsclcncpssm-provide-analysis-of-supreme-court-ruling/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=nsclcncpssm-provide-analysis-of-supreme-court-ruling</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nsclcncpssm-provide-analysis-of-supreme-court-ruling/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jul 2012 18:52:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NSCLC Helps</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Reform Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=5375</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This analysis , completed on the day of the decision June 28, 2012, provides an analysis of how the Affordable Care Act ruling impacts Medicare, Medicaid and older Americans.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nsclcncpssm-provide-analysis-of-supreme-court-ruling/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NSCLC Files Amicus Brief on Minimum Staff Levels</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nsclc-files-amicus-brief-on-minimum-staff-levels/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=nsclc-files-amicus-brief-on-minimum-staff-levels</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nsclc-files-amicus-brief-on-minimum-staff-levels/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 17:53:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NSCLC Helps</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nursing Homes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[long term care]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4823</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(2012) The National Senior Citizens Law Center, along with AARP, has submitted a friend of the court appellate brief in the California Court of Appeals supporting the right of nursing home residents to enforce California&#8217;s minimum nursing home staffing levels. &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nsclc-files-amicus-brief-on-minimum-staff-levels/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nsclc-files-amicus-brief-on-minimum-staff-levels/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Amicus Brief: National Federation of Independent Businesses et al v Sebelius et al / State of Florida et al v DHHS et al</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-natl-fed-of-independent-businesses-v-sebelius-state-of-florida-v-dhhs/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=amicus-brief-natl-fed-of-independent-businesses-v-sebelius-state-of-florida-v-dhhs</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-natl-fed-of-independent-businesses-v-sebelius-state-of-florida-v-dhhs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 19:10:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Care Act]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4622</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this joint Supreme Court friend of the court brief submitted on January 30, 2012, it is argued that the provisions of the Affordable Care Act affecting those over age 65 should not be affected if the minimum coverage provision is &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-natl-fed-of-independent-businesses-v-sebelius-state-of-florida-v-dhhs/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-natl-fed-of-independent-businesses-v-sebelius-state-of-florida-v-dhhs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Individual Mandate Supported in Supreme Court Amicus Brief</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/individual-mandate-supported-in-supreme-court-amicus-brief/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=individual-mandate-supported-in-supreme-court-amicus-brief</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/individual-mandate-supported-in-supreme-court-amicus-brief/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 21:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NSCLC Helps</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Care Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4515</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ In a Supreme Court amicus brief submitted January 11, 2012, National Senior Citizens Law Center’s Rochelle Bobroff, acting as Counsel of Record, writes that that the Affordable Care Act’s minimum coverage provision or individual mandate “falls squarely within Congress’ authority to &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/individual-mandate-supported-in-supreme-court-amicus-brief/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/individual-mandate-supported-in-supreme-court-amicus-brief/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bagnall v Sebelius</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/bagnall-v-sebelius/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=bagnall-v-sebelius</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/bagnall-v-sebelius/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 19:44:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=3883</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Background Medicare Part A pays for “inpatient” hospital care, while Part B pays for outpatient medical care.  In order to qualify for Medicare-covered nursing facility care, one must first have at least three days of “inpatient” Part A hospital care.  &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/bagnall-v-sebelius/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/bagnall-v-sebelius/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Amicus Brief Filed in Florida Health Reform Case</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-filed-in-florida-health-reform-case/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=amicus-brief-filed-in-florida-health-reform-case</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-filed-in-florida-health-reform-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 20:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care Litigation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yerdomain.com/nsclc/?p=2862</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Health Reform’s Pre-Existing Condition Provision Unworkable Absent Individual Mandate WASHINGTON, DC –In a friend-of-the-court or amicus brief filed Nov. 17 in the Florida health reform case, the National Senior Citizens Law Center and 11 other groups present “empirical evidence and &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-filed-in-florida-health-reform-case/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-filed-in-florida-health-reform-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NSCLC Files Amicus Brief in Support of Health Reform</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-in-support-of-health-reform/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=amicus-brief-in-support-of-health-reform</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-in-support-of-health-reform/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:37:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care Litigation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yerdomain.com/nsclc/?p=2854</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On June 17, 2010, attorneys from the Center for American Progress, the Federal Rights Project of the National Senior Citizens Law Center, and PCT Law Group, PLLC, filed an Amicus Brief in support of the federal government’s Motion to Dismiss &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-in-support-of-health-reform/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/amicus-brief-in-support-of-health-reform/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Order Granting Motion for Preliminary Injuction</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/order-granting-motion-for-preliminary-injuction/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=order-granting-motion-for-preliminary-injuction</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/order-granting-motion-for-preliminary-injuction/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:38:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care Litigation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yerdomain.com/nsclc/?p=1479</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cota v. Maxwell-Jolly. Adult Day Health Care Case. READ MORE]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/order-granting-motion-for-preliminary-injuction/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>