August 2025

MSMA Joins MultiPlan Antirust Litigation as Plaintiff

In July, the Missouri State Medical Association joined the MultiPlan Antitrust Litigation as a plaintiff. This is a federal antitrust action against MultiPlan, a healthcare data firm, and leading health insurance companies, including UnitedHealth, Anthem, and Cigna.

Plaintiffs, including the Missouri State Medical Association and the American Medical Association, claim these companies participated in a coordinated price-fixing conspiracy to generate billions in profits for MultiPlan and insurance providers by forcing physicians to accept increasingly low reimbursements for out-of-network services. Plaintiffs seek to end this illegal conduct as well as recoup financial damages for providers who were harmed by this conduct.  

The lawsuits against MultiPlan have been consolidated into a multi-district litigation filed in the Northern District of Illinois before Judge Matthew Kennelly. In March 2025, the Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in the litigation, and in June 2025, Judge Kennelly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss, allowing the case to proceed to discovery.

The Missouri State Medical Association will keep you updated as the case progresses.

What are the allegations?

• Since 2015, MultiPlan has forced physicians to accept increasingly low payments for out-of-network services, which often do not cover providers’ operating costs.
• Insurance companies like UnitedHealth, Anthem, and Cigna provided MultiPlan with competitively sensitive, confidential information on pricing and reimbursement rates that they could not have otherwise legally shared with each other.
• MultiPlan then used this data in its proprietary algorithm to develop and set substandard reimbursement rates to physicians for out-of-network healthcare services. 
• MultiPlan left providers with little room to negotiate its offered reimbursement rates and requires that physicians who accept reimbursement not pursue additional balances owed by patients.

What does this mean for members?

• The Missouri State Medical Association joining the lawsuit does not make our members individual plaintiffs.
• Your practice may also be entitled to financial damages against Multiplan and other insurance companies.

How can individual physicians learn more?

• You can reach out to the three lawyers who have been appointed as co-lead counsel in the litigation: Matthew M. Lavin of Arnall Golden Gregory (the direct lawyer for the AMA and Illinois State Medical Society); Hunter J. Shkolnik of Napoli Shkolnik Attorneys at Law; and Christopher A. Seeger of Seeger Weiss LLP.  You can start a free case evaluation here.
• You can watch a recorded webinar hosted by Matt Lavin of Arnall Golden Gregory. Passcode: NwyPS?1?

If you have any questions, please reach out to MSMA EVP Jeff Howell at jhowell@msma.org.

August 2025

Missouri’s Collaborative Practice Under Fire—Physicians Must Stay Engaged

On August 21, Columbia nurse practitioner backed by the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) filed a lawsuit challenging Missouri’s collaborative practice agreement (CPA) requirement. The suit targets Attorney General Andrew Bailey and members of the state’s regulatory boards, namely the Missouri Boards of Nursing and Registration for the Healing Arts as defendants. The complaint claims that CPAs are unconstitutional and financially burdensome.

Let’s be clear: this lawsuit isn’t just about one practitioner’s frustration—it’s part of a coordinated national campaign to dismantle physician oversight and redefine scope of practice through the courts. PLF, a libertarian legal group with a history of opposing professional regulation, argues that CPAs are “permission slips” with no public safety value. That claim is not only misleading—it’s dangerous. CPAs exist to protect patients, ensure continuity of care, and uphold clinical standards through physician-led, team-based care. They are not bureaucratic relics—they are safeguards rooted in decades of medical expertise and interdisciplinary teamwork.

The lawsuit cites a $52,800 annual cost for a CPA but fails to acknowledge that collaboration is not a transactional checkbox—it’s a shared responsibility. Physicians provide oversight, mentorship, and accountability that cannot be replaced by independent practice alone. The lawsuit also ignores the flexibility already built into Missouri’s CPA framework, which allows for tailored agreements based on specialty, setting, and patient population.

If successful, this legal challenge could erode the integrity of team-based care, weaken patient protections, and sideline physicians from critical decision-making. Missouri’s medical community must stay informed, engaged, and vocal. This is not just a regulatory issue—it’s a fight for the future of safe, collaborative care.

Read the full complaint here.