A postmaster in South Dakota has been ordered to pay a civil judgment of $353,441.42 to the United States for defrauding the United States Postal Service (USPS). In United States v. Christeson, Judge Karen E.
In United States ex rel. Forney v. Medtronic, Inc., Judge Edward G. Smith of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled in favor of the Relator by denying medical device manufacturer, Medtronic’s request for summary judgment. Judge Smith ruled that Relator Forney was not barred by the public disclosure bar because she is an original source that “materially added” to the publically disclosed allegations of fraud against Medtronic.
The beat goes on…
According to a May 31, 2018 filing in New Jersey federal court, Dr. Thomas Savino of Staten Island was sentenced to four years imprisonment and three years’ supervised release, and was ordered to pay a $100,000 fine and forfeit $27,500 for his part in the Biodiagnostic Laboratory Services fraud.
What Happened?
On May 23, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, Judge Richard M. Gergel, imposed a $111 million judgment against former Health Diagnostics Laboratory (“HDL”) CEO, Latonya Mallory, and former BlueWave Healthcare Consultants (“BlueWave”) owners, Floyd Dent III and Robert Bradford Johnson.
On May 21, 2018, Judge Lawrence F. Stengel of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted Relator Gohil’s motion to compel calling for the production of hundreds of attorney-client privilege-asserted documents in a False Claims Act dispute.
In the underlying case, United States of America ex rel.
What Happened?
Jeffrey Wertkin, a former Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP partner who previously had worked at the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), received 30 months’ imprisonment for offenses related to his theft and attempted sale of a sealed government whistleblower complaint to a cyber-security company being investigated by the DOJ.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Escobar creates a new tension between CMS’s historical “pay and chase” framework and the idea that when the government continues to pay claims when it has information regarding potential fraud, the conduct involved is not material to the payment decision. Admittedly, it would be premature to commence administrative proceedings to debar providers at the inception of an investigation.
1. How far will the Supreme Court’s materiality ruling in Escobar extend?
2. Will there be any type of legislative “fix” to the Escobar ruling, and its growing progeny, being decided by scores of federal courts?
3.
What Happened?
In affirming the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of Accredo Health Group, Inc., and its co-defendants, the U.S.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has affirmed a District Court’s judgment on a husband and wife’s health care fraud convictions. The Appellate Court found that medical necessity was a “critical prerequisite to payment” and insurers would not have knowingly paid for medically unnecessary urine drug tests.
If you are aware of any person, corporation or entity that you think may be violating the Federal False Claims Act or a State False Claims Act, contact us today.