ArMA Joins Lawsuit Against MultiPlan & Leading Insurance Providers Over Health Care Price-Fixing

March 13, 2026

Federal antitrust litigation seeks to hold MultiPlan and major insurance companies responsible for an alleged coordinated price-fixing scheme and resulting under-reimbursement for out-of-network services.

PHOENIX, Arizona — The Arizona Medical Association (ArMA) has joined a federal multi-district litigation against MultiPlan (rebranded to Claritev) and major insurers, including UnitedHealth, Elevance, Humana, Aetna, and Cigna, alleging they conspired to systematically underpay healthcare practitioners for reimbursements for out-of-network services, which often fail to cover operating costs. MultiPlan goes by many names, including Data iSight, Viant, NCN, ProPricer, and MARS. As of 2024, MultiPlan processes more than 80% of all commercial out-of-network reimbursement claims in the United States.

ArMA joins the American Medical Association (AMA) and hundreds of physician practices and facilities nationwide in this growing antitrust litigation. Plaintiffs allege that MultiPlan facilitated a price-fixing agreement among insurers that artificially suppressed out-of-network payment rates, costing clinicians billions of dollars. This lawsuit, filed in the Northern District Court of Illinois in 2024, seeks to end MultiPlan’s alleged anticompetitive scheme, which it has operated since at least 2015, and recoup financial damages for practitioners and practices.

“For many years, physicians in Arizona have been forced to accept increasingly insufficient reimbursements for providing healthcare to out-of-network patients,” said ArMA President Dr. Jason Jameson. “This lawsuit is an important step to ensure that physicians are justly reimbursed for the care we provide — not only today, but also for historical underpayments going back more than a decade — and end this alleged illegal collusion that hurts patients.”

Physicians who believe they have been harmed by MultiPlan and the insurance companies, whether current or in past years, can obtain a free case evaluation from one of the attorneys appointed by the court to lead the non-class claims. Clinicians may not always know whether MultiPlan — or one of its services, such as Data iSight, Viant, NCN, ProPricer, or MARS — re-priced their claims. However, clues can often be found in Explanations of Benefits or remittance advice.

The court has also appointed attorneys to litigate a proposed antitrust class action on the same issues, but a ruling on any proposed class certification is not expected until 2027. Physicians who believe they have been impacted by MultiPlan’s conduct can choose to pursue their claims individually on a non-class basis now and do not need to wait for any ruling on a proposed class.

"The Arizona Medical Association is dedicated to helping physicians navigate the increasingly turbulent and complicated landscape of healthcare so they can focus on what matters most: patient care," shared ArMA CEO Doug Laher, MBA, CAE. "We're proud to be a part of this historic lawsuit, which aims to protect and support those who heal our communities."

Members of the Arizona Medical Association interested in joining the lawsuit as litigants are eligible for discounted contingency fees. Anyone who would like to learn more about the case can do so by emailing communications@AZmed.org.

About Arizona Medical Association 

Fostering medicine. Championing care. Serving Arizona.

The Arizona Medical Association is the largest organization in the state representing the interests of all physicians and physicians-in-training. Since 1892, ArMA has been advancing patient care and providing its members with leadership, advocacy, education, and community. Alongside our members, we foster the practice of medicine, champion patient care, and strengthen the communities we serve. For more information, visit www.AZmed.org and follow ArMA on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter/X, and LinkedIn. 

About Court-appointed Counsel 

Gilbert LLP

Gilbert LLP is a nationally recognized law firm specializing in complex dispute resolution, insurance recovery and risk management, strategic corporate counseling, bankruptcy and receiverships, and high‑stakes litigation. The firm delivers results through innovative legal strategies that integrate business insight and practical problem-solving. Clients include corporations, creditor committees, trustees, and other stakeholders across industries, navigating intricate insurance matters, multidimensional commercial disputes, reorganization and trust implementation, and transactional risk issues. Gilbert LLP focuses on engineered, outcomes-driven solutions that align with broader business objectives. Learn more.


Seeger Weiss
One of the nation’s preeminent plaintiffs’ law firms, Seeger Weiss is best known for multidistrict mass torts and class actions in both state and federal court—and especially for taking those cases to trial. With the resources and dedication to take on the world’s largest corporations, the firm has an impressive track record of victories against companies like Merck, Monsanto, and 3M—and a reputation for sticking with a case from beginning to end. From offices in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, the firm has represented over 10,000 individuals, companies, and governments across the United States who have been injured or defrauded on a massive scale. Since its founding in 1999, it has led many of the most complex and high-profile cases in the country: the National Prescription Opiate Litigation, which the Washington Post called “the largest federal court case in U.S. history”; the “Dieselgate” scandal; the sprawling multistate litigation on behalf of survivors of child sexual abuse; and the history-making National Football League Players’ Concussion Injury Litigation. Learn more.

Napoli Shkolnik
Napoli Shkolnik is a nationally recognized law firm that has built an impressive track record by bringing a client-focused approach to complex, often large-scale litigation, largely in the areas of mass torts, environmental law, civil rights, product liability and pharmaceutical, commercial litigation, and medical malpractice & personal injury. Headquartered in New York, the firm has additional offices across the United States, as well as affiliate offices in Puerto Rico and Canada, affording the resources and reach to effectively pursue difficult cases and win favorable outcomes for its clients. Learn more.

Media Contact: 

Shelby Job
(602) 291-4670
sjob@AZmed.org

ADHS Issues Standing Orders for Flu, COVID-19 Vaccine Access

By Admin User • September 18, 2026
Statewide orders keep pharmacists and physicians authorized to vaccinate Arizonans amid uncertainty over the next ACIP meeting. Statewide Orders Cover the 2026-27 Flu & COVID Season The Arizona Department of Health Services has issued statewide standing orders supporting access to the 2026-27 influenza and COVID-19 vaccines approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Arizonans seeking a flu or COVID-19 vaccine should contact their physician or pharmacy to confirm availability. Why the Orders Were Issued Arizona pharmacists may administer vaccines recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, vaccines recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for international travel, or vaccines authorized under a prescription, including a physician-issued public health standing order. With the timing of the next ACIP meeting uncertain, ADHS worked with the Arizona Board of Pharmacy to issue statewide standing orders for the flu and COVID-19 vaccines, which function as a prescription allowing pharmacists and physicians across Arizona to administer them to anyone who wants one. ADHS Medical Advisor Weighs In "Vaccines are one of the most important tools we have to protect our communities. The Influenza and COVID-19 vaccines have been proven safe and effective at preventing severe illness, hospitalization, and death. Vaccines help us limit the spread of disease, reduce pressure on our healthcare system and reduce costs," said Dr. Richard Carmona, ADHS public health medical advisor and the 17th U.S. Surgeon General. "We have issued these standing orders to ensure safe and timely access to the vaccines in alignment with scientific and evidence-based guidance." What Arizonans Should Know The standing orders do not require every pharmacy to offer vaccinations, and they do not guarantee insurance coverage for administration. Coverage and out-of-pocket costs vary by plan, so Arizonans should check with their insurance provider before scheduling an appointment. 

Arizona Asks Supreme Court to Halt Prison Health Care Takeover

By Admin User • September 18, 2026
State attorneys seek an emergency stay after lower courts reject bids to delay receivership of the prison health care system. State Makes a Last-Ditch Appeal Attorneys for the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry asked the U.S. Supreme Court this week to delay a court-ordered receivership of the state's prison health care system. The request comes after both a federal district court and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to pause the takeover. In the recent application, former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, a representative of the department, argued that the state deserves more time to make its case before surrendering control of its operations, including oversight of its employees and health care budget. Roots of the Case The dispute began in 2012 when inmates sued the department, alleging the prison system's inadequate medical, mental health, and dental care amounted to cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. The case went through years of litigation and a failed settlement agreement. In 2023, U.S. District Judge Roslyn Silver ruled that the health care system was "grossly inadequate." The court ordered the prison healthcare system to comply with more than 150 "quality indicators," but according to court-appointed monitors, the department failed to comply with 131 of the measures. In light of this finding, Silver named Annette Chambers-Smith, former director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, to take over as receiver effective Oct. 19. Arguments on Both Sides Clement argues receivership should be the last resort and that Silver moved to it too quickly. He asserts that the department has made measurable progress, including growing its health care staffing by more than 50%, expanding substance-use treatment access, and adopting a new care model. Corene Kendrick, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union National Prison Project, which represents the roughly 25,000 people incarcerated in Arizona prisons, called the department's request a "Hail Mary" and said Silver had given the department years of opportunities to comply before ordering receivership. What Happens Next The Supreme Court has not yet set a deadline for the plaintiffs to respond to the stay request. Separately, the 9th Circuit is now reviewing the merits of the receivership order itself. The department filed its opening brief on Sept. 15, and the plaintiffs' response is due Oct. 15. Information in this article was sourced from the Arizona Mirror .