WORCESTER MEDICINE
In Memoriam
Legal Consult Continued
well as aligning with MassHealth’s “financial incentive to detect and recover all overpayments as quickly as possible.” Next, the court noted Massachusetts does not have a specific statute of limitation applicable to MassHealth’s recoupment efforts and in that case the analysis turns to “the essential nature of the right” at issue. Given the relationship between providers and the MassHealth program is governed by a provider agreement, the court concluded the essential nature of the right at issue was a contractual one, thereby justifying application of the six-year contractual statute of limitations to MassHealth recoupment proceedings. The court rejected MassHealth’s contention that an overpayment recovery proceeding is not an “action” as used in the limitations statute and noted other administrative proceedings are subject to statutes of limitations. The court also noted when, in other cases, it determined that no statute of limitations was intended to apply, there was clear legislative guidance to that effect. MassHealth had argued that because the legislature had imposed a statute of limitations on proceedings involving other violations of MassHealth rules, its failure to do so with respect to MassHealth overpayment recoupment proceedings demonstrated a specific legislative intent not to so limit such proceedings. Normally, this is a compelling argument, but the court rejected it in part because “we discern no reason why the legislature would not want to impose a statute of limitations.” The court here, attributing to the legislature a state of mind founded on no specific factual findings, appears to be straining toward a desired outcome based not upon technical legal doctrine but common sense and fairness. That conclusion is supported by the following passage, where the court addressed the obvious unfairness and impracticality of allowing an administrative agency to commence a proceeding long after the acts underlying that proceeding have taken place: “We also are struck by the absurd consequences of MassHealth’s argument. Taken to its logical conclusion, MassHealth’s argument would mean that no administrative proceeding would have a time deadline for commencement or conclusion unless the legislature expressly imposed a statute of limitations. Like Rip Van Winkle, an administrative agency could wake up 20 or even 100 years later and bring enforcement proceedings against a provider or other party doing business with the government. We do not believe that was the legislature’s intention.” Sometimes, the court will note an absurdity resulting from legislation and conclude the best solution is to have the legislature fix the problem it created. Here, the court seems to have been swayed by the same sense of absurdity and unfairness health care providers often feel when they discern rules of procedure unfairly burden them but do not apply to government agencies. This decision, though it may not have been arrived at through the most exacting legal analysis, comes as a welcome relief to all health care providers. They will no longer be forever at risk of MassHealth recoupment claims.
Dr. Robert W. Finberg Dr. Robert W. Finberg was the true triple threat in academic medicine. He was a brilliant teacher, an accomplished researcher and an astute clinician. His sudden death on Aug. 30, 2021, at the age of 71 left the University of Massachusetts T.H. Chan Medical School bereft of one of the finest scholars and physicians in America. Until last year, Bob was the chair of the department of medicine. Prior to coming to UMass, he was chief of infectious diseases at the Dana-Farber Cancer Center. Anyone who remembers the year 2000, when Bob arrived at the medical school, will recall the department of medicine was a small, albeit talented, cluster of clinicians and researchers. Bob transformed the department into a renowned provider of high-quality medical services as well as a world-class research engine with tremendous success at high profile discoveries and research funding. Bob had numerous talents. First and foremost, he was mentor to a legion of successful academic physicians, physician scientists and other scholars. His trainees literally populated the academic community with highly talented physicians, scientists and clinician-scientists. Second, he had a consummate ability to get the job done. Whether a difficult research project or the restructuring of a clinical department, important problems were resolved under his management. It was no surprise Bob organized numerous research projects to answer the challenge of SARS-CoV-2, nor that his operation ran smoothly under his spectacular organizational skills. Perhaps Bob’s most inspiring gift to his family, friends and colleagues was the passion he had toward all aspects of life. Bob was as happy tackling the numerous challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic as the innate immune response to respiratory syncytial virus, climbing Mount Kilimanjaro or achieving a deep learning of the history of architectural innovation in the city of Chicago. Bob’s untimely death resulted in great sorrow in the UMass community. We know the pain his family feels must be far greater and wish to comfort them with the knowledge that Bob will not be forgotten. He was a great man and we will all miss him. Douglas Golenbock, MD The Neil and Margery Blacklow Chair in Infectious Diseases and Immunology, Professor and Chief, Division of Infectious Diseases and Immunology, The University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2021
19
