Residential Treatment Was Not Medically Necessary, 10th Circuit Panel Affirms
(October 30, 2015, 9:37 AM EDT) -- DENVER — A district court did not err in determining that a health insurer’s denial of benefits for residential treatment of an insured’s eating disorder was reasonable because all of the relevant factors supported the insurer’s conclusion that residential treatment was not medically necessary, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Oct. 13 (M.K. v. Visa CIGNA Network POS Plan, No. 14-4143, 10th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 17782).