Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing for lack of standing plaintiffs' action seeking to collect on healthcare receivables assigned to them by Medicare Advantage Organization (MAO), where plaintiff alleged that defendant, as primary insurer, failed to pay for medical expenses covered by insurance policy under circumstances, where MAO, as secondary insurer, had made conditional payments on behalf of defendant. While Medicare Act recognized existence of plaintiffs' potential cause of action against defendant, instant plaintiffs lacked standing to bring instant action, where, after discovery had taken place, plaintiffs had failed to identify within their basket of receivables, example of concrete and definite amount owed to them by defendant. Ct. rejected plaintiffs' claim that allegation of mere existence of assignment to them to collect potentially un-reimbursed payments was sufficient to establish standing. Moreover, record did not support plaintiffs' citation to single claim within said basket of receivables where defendant owed them money, where payments made by MAO were for knee injury that did not arise out of car accident that was covered under defendant's insurance policy, and thus said payments for treatment given to insured's knee were not made on behalf of defendant for purposes of Medicare Act. Ct. also disapproved of plaintiffs' apparent tactic of filing instant lawsuit in hope that discovery would find existence of viable claim, rather than performing some due diligence to find existence of viable claim prior to filing instant lawsuit.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Standing