Mayo Clinic Lawsuit, Why One of America’s Top Hospitals Is Facing Multiple Legal Cases Over Patient Care and Employee Benefits
When you think of Mayo Clinic, you probably think of world-class healthcare. But right now, one of America’s most prestigious medical institutions is fighting legal battles on multiple fronts—from employees claiming they can’t afford their own healthcare to families alleging medical negligence in a heart transplant that went “catastrophically wrong.”
Here’s something that catches people off guard: Mayo Clinic employees have reported racking up more than $10,000 in annual healthcare costs while working for one of the world’s most prestigious healthcare organizations. And that’s just one of several lawsuits making headlines.
What Are the Mayo Clinic Lawsuits About?
Mayo Clinic currently faces three major legal challenges that have made national news:
The Employee Health Insurance Class Action (April 2024) A Mayo Clinic employee filed a proposed class action lawsuit alleging they were saddled with enormous healthcare bills after claims were “systemically underpaid”. The lawsuit targets both Mayo and Medica, the company that administers Mayo’s employee health plan.
The Charity Care Settlement (March 2025) Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison reached a settlement requiring Mayo to change its charity care and debt collection practices after allegations the hospital sued patients who may have qualified for charity care to collect medical debt.
The Heart Transplant Medical Negligence Case (March 2024) A family filed a federal lawsuit alleging Mayo committed medical negligence, medical battery and negligent nondisclosure after a heart transplant patient’s donor heart “essentially fell apart” during surgery.
The Employee Health Insurance Lawsuit: When Healthcare Workers Can’t Afford Healthcare
This case has drawn attention because of its irony: healthcare workers at a premier medical institution struggling to afford medical care.
What Employees Are Claiming:
The lawsuit alleges Medica uses “deceptive, misleading, arbitrary” pricing methods that leave plan members in the dark about health costs and allow for inconsistent reimbursement rates, violating federal law and Medica’s fiduciary responsibilities.
The problem centers on what’s called a “phantom network.” According to the lawsuit, when the plaintiff used the Medica portal they found zero in-network providers, leading them to believe they could have care covered for out-of-network healthcare. But when bills arrived, Mayo and Medica only covered a fraction of the costs.
The Executive Perk That Made Headlines:
The claim alleges Mayo doctors and executives receive an annual allowance of up to $10,000 per year to cover the difference between out-of-network and in-network coinsurance costs as well as dental and orthodontic expenses, while other employees are not given this allowance.
This detail particularly angered employees who felt there was a two-tiered system—one for executives and physicians, another for everyone else.
What Federal Law Says:
The lawsuit centers on ERISA—the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974—which requires employers to act as fiduciaries when managing employee benefit plans. That means making decisions in employees’ best interests, not the company’s bottom line.
Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, employers must ensure transparency in healthcare costs and can’t hide how they calculate reimbursements. The Mayo lawsuit claims these transparency requirements were violated.
Current Status: The case is pending in U.S. District Court in Minnesota. Both Mayo and Medica have declined to comment on pending litigation.
The Charity Care Settlement: Suing Patients Who Couldn’t Pay
In March 2025, Mayo reached a significant settlement with Minnesota’s Attorney General after a two-year investigation into the hospital’s charity care practices.
What the Investigation Found:
The Attorney General’s investigation found that Mayo Clinic’s policies included barriers to patients’ access to charity care and Mayo engaged in aggressive debt-collection practices in contravention of the Minnesota Hospital Agreement and its charitable mission and values.
Mayo allegedly steered patients away from charity care, in some cases instructing staff to avoid discussing charity care and instead ask patients to take out a loan or borrow from a family member to pay medical bills.
What Changed:
As a result of the investigation, the percentage of Mayo’s operating expenses provided to charity care in 2024 rose to the highest level in more than five years, more than doubling the amount from 2022 to 2024.
The settlement requires Mayo to:
- Provide free care to patients with incomes up to 200% of federal poverty guidelines
- Offer 40-50% discounts for patients with incomes up to 400% of federal poverty guidelines
- Screen certain patients for presumptive eligibility without requiring applications
- Stop suing patients to collect debt except in “extraordinary circumstances”
No Financial Penalty: The settlement does not include financial penalties nor a restitution payment but requires the nonprofit to increase the availability of charity care.
Mayo’s Response: Mayo contests many of the Attorney General’s findings and notes the settlement doesn’t require them to change current policies because Mayo agreed to continue policies and practices that it began long before the settlement was reached.
The Heart Transplant Tragedy: “The Perfect Heart” That Fell Apart
This case involves 40-year-old Noah Leopold, a Florida man who needed a heart transplant after years of heart damage from childhood cancer treatment.
What Happened During Surgery:
The donor heart was transported in an “organ care system” machine, also known as “heart in a box,” which keeps the heart warm, beating and filled with blood during travel. By the time it arrived, Leopold’s own heart had already been removed.
According to the surgical log, after the donor heart was placed in Leopold’s chest “it became apparent the heart started having a large amount of blood infiltration,” or leakage, “and become extremely friable,” meaning easily crumbled.
The surgeon noted they tried for hours to stop the bleeding but ultimately had to remove the transplanted heart. Leopold was placed on artificial support, received a second successful transplant days later, but died the next day from a brain bleed.
What the Family Says Mayo Didn’t Disclose:
The lawsuit makes several explosive claims about what Mayo allegedly failed to tell Leopold:
- The donor’s cause of death: The lawsuit claims the donor died from a methamphetamine overdose. The family’s attorney stated Leopold “got the heart of a meth addict” and Mayo had an obligation to disclose this.
- Research about risky donor hearts: Court records show Mayo doctors had published a 2022 medical journal study titled “Heart Transplant Recipients of Donors with Intracranial Hemorrhage Have Worse Survival,” which concluded such donors “should be considered with caution”. The family alleges Noah was never told about this research or the additional risk.
- The “Heart in a Box” device: In a deposition, a Mayo doctor admitted he did not tell Leopold that the donor heart would be transported using the OCS “Heart in a Box” device, despite some experts believing it was riskier than traditional ice transport.
Mayo’s Defense:
Mayo denies all allegations. In their statement, Mayo said they “follow applicable medical standards of care, guidance of national organizations that oversee organ donation and procurement, and the privacy rights of organ donors”.
Mayo argues they properly informed Leopold the heart had risk factors for diseases like Hepatitis and HIV, and that he consented to the operation. They also claim national transplant guidelines protect donor confidentiality and don’t require disclosing specific causes of death.
Trial Date: December 1, 2025, in U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota.
What This Means for Patients and Healthcare Workers
These lawsuits highlight growing concerns about healthcare transparency and nonprofit hospital practices.
For Employees:
The employee lawsuit is part of a national trend. Similar cases have been filed against Johnson & Johnson, with employees alleging mismanagement of prescription drug benefits. These cases signal that employees are increasingly willing to challenge employers who they believe aren’t managing health benefits properly.
For Patients:
The charity care settlement reflects broader scrutiny of nonprofit hospitals. Despite receiving substantial tax exemptions for their nonprofit status, some hospitals have been accused of aggressive billing and collection practices against low-income patients.
For Transplant Recipients:
The heart transplant case raises questions about informed consent in organ transplantation—specifically, how much information patients have a right to know about donor organs and transplant procedures.
Frequently Asked Questions About the Mayo Clinic Lawsuits
Is Mayo Clinic being sued right now?
Yes, Mayo faces an ongoing employee class action lawsuit over health insurance costs (filed April 2024) and a medical negligence lawsuit over a failed heart transplant (filed March 2024). The charity care case was settled in March 2025.
What is the Mayo Clinic employee lawsuit about?
Employees allege Mayo and insurance administrator Medica systematically underpaid healthcare claims, leaving employees with enormous out-of-pocket costs despite believing they had adequate coverage.
Did Mayo Clinic lose the charity care lawsuit?
It wasn’t decided by a court—Mayo reached a settlement requiring enhanced charity care policies and prohibiting most debt collection lawsuits against patients. No financial penalty was imposed.
What happened in the Mayo heart transplant lawsuit?
A family alleges Mayo failed to properly inform their loved one that his donor heart came from someone who died of a methamphetamine overdose, and that the heart “fell apart” during surgery after his original heart was already removed.
Can I join the Mayo Clinic class action lawsuit?
If you’re a Mayo Clinic employee or covered under Mayo’s employee health plan administered by Medica and faced high out-of-network costs, you may be eligible. Contact the law firms handling the case: Joseph A. Larson Law Firm or McCune Law Group.
Has Mayo Clinic responded to these lawsuits?
Mayo has denied wrongdoing in both active lawsuits. For the employee case, Mayo stated they’re “committed to supporting the health and wellness of our employees.” For the heart transplant case, Mayo says they followed all applicable medical standards and provided proper informed consent.
Will Mayo Clinic have to pay patients back for charity care?
No, the settlement doesn’t include financial restitution. It requires policy changes going forward but doesn’t compensate patients who were previously billed.
Is Mayo Clinic still a good hospital?
Mayo remains one of the nation’s top-ranked hospitals across many specialties. These lawsuits involve specific claims about business practices and individual cases, not the overall quality of medical care.
What Happens Next
Employee Health Insurance Case: The class action is in early stages. If certified as a class action, it could include thousands of Mayo employees. Discovery is ongoing.
Heart Transplant Case: Set for jury trial in December 2025. This will be a closely watched case given Mayo’s reputation and the questions it raises about transplant informed consent.
Charity Care Implementation: Mayo must maintain the new charity care policies under Attorney General oversight. The settlement reflects growing pressure on nonprofit hospitals to justify their tax-exempt status through community benefits.
The Bigger Picture
These lawsuits aren’t happening in isolation. Across the country, employees are challenging employers over health benefit management, states are investigating nonprofit hospitals’ charity care practices, and patients are questioning whether they received adequate informed consent for medical procedures.
What makes the Mayo cases notable is that they involve one of America’s most respected medical institutions—a reminder that even world-class hospitals aren’t immune to legal challenges over how they treat employees and patients.
The Bottom Line: Mayo Clinic faces multiple legal challenges that reflect broader tensions in American healthcare: employees struggling to afford care despite working for healthcare organizations, nonprofit hospitals balancing charitable missions with financial pressures, and questions about how much information patients deserve when making life-or-death medical decisions. While Mayo denies wrongdoing and contests many allegations, these cases will shape how healthcare institutions handle employee benefits, charity care, and informed consent going forward.
This article provides general information about pending litigation involving Mayo Clinic and should not be considered legal advice. Lawsuits contain allegations that have not been proven in court. Mayo Clinic denies wrongdoing in active cases. For legal guidance specific to your situation, consult with an attorney.
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah