South Dakota Codified Laws 58-17H-42. Insufficient information for determination of prospective urgent care requests
If the benefit request involves a prospective review urgent care request, the provisions of § 58-17H-41 apply only in the case of a failure that:
(1) Is a communication by a covered person or, if applicable, the covered person’s authorized representative, that is received by a person or organizational unit of the health carrier responsible for handling benefit matters; and
Terms Used In South Dakota Codified Laws 58-17H-42
- Jurisdiction: (1) The legal authority of a court to hear and decide a case. Concurrent jurisdiction exists when two courts have simultaneous responsibility for the same case. (2) The geographic area over which the court has authority to decide cases.
- Person: includes natural persons, partnerships, associations, cooperative corporations, limited liability companies, and corporations. See South Dakota Codified Laws 2-14-2
(2) Is a communication that refers to a specific covered person, a specific medical condition or symptom, and a specific health care service, treatment, or provider for which approval is being requested.
Source: SL 2011, ch 219, § 67.
Commission Note: SL 2012, ch 239, § 1 provides: “The provisions of chapter 219 of the 2011 Session Laws shall be deemed repealed if the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119 (2010), as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-152, 124 Stat. 1029 (2010) is found to be unconstitutional in its entirety by a final decision of a federal court of competent jurisdiction and all appeals exhausted or time for appeals elapsed.”