Colorado Health Law Blog

Home/Colorado Health Law Blog

Oncology Practice in Florida Reaches $100 Million Deal With DOJ in Antitrust Probe

Attorney Carole C. Schriefer

By Carole C. Schriefer, J.D.

On April 30, 2020, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that a major Florida oncology group will pay $100 million to resolve a criminal charge that it conspired with competitors to divvy up cancer treatments in the area. This marks the first settlement in an ongoing oncology market allocation probe against Florida Cancer Specialists & Research Institute LLC (FCS).

Details of the Antitrust Complaint.

The oncology group, which is based in Fort Myers, Florida, admitted to a single felony antitrust charge under the agreement, the DOJ said. Additionally, FCS inked a civil antitrust settlement with the Florida attorney general requiring it to pay the state $20 million, plus interest.

According to the DOJ, federal prosecutors filed a one-count felony charge against the company in Florida federal court. Prosecutors allege the company of participating “in a criminal antitrust conspiracy” with unnamed oncology competitors in the southwest Florida counties of Lee, Collier, and Charlotte.

The antitrust complaint states: “FCS and its co-conspirators agreed not to compete to provide chemotherapy and radiation treatments to cancer patients in Southwest Florida. Beginning as early as 1999 and continuing until at least 2016, FCS entered into an illegal agreement that allocated chemotherapy treatments to FCS and radiation treatments to a competing oncology group.” Therefore, according to the DOJ, “This conspiracy allowed FCS to operate with minimal competition in Southwest Florida and limited valuable integrated care options and choices for cancer patients.”

We want to point out that the quotations above are statements that were made by the government in relation to this case and were not necessarily proven or agreed to by FCS.

The Settlement Agreement.

Under the settlement agreement, the Florida oncology company admitted to a conspiracy to divvy up the radiation and chemotherapy treatments. In addition to the $100 million, which is the statutory maximum, FCS will have to “cooperate fully with the Antitrust Division’s ongoing investigation” being run with the FBI’s Fort Myers satellite office and must keep up a compliance program aimed at stopping and ferreting out criminal antitrust violations.

Additionally, the deal also obliges FCS to follow a “non-compete waiver” under which it promises not to enforce any non-compete provisions with current and former oncologists. Other employees who open an oncology practice in southwest Florida or join one are also included in the provision, said the DOJ.

Criminal Antitrust Charges are Rarely Sought.

Criminal antitrust charges are rarely brought by the government, especially under the current administration. Anyone that has ever been involved in bringing or defending an anti-trust case knows that it is difficult enough to even have the government open a civil case or investigation, much less a criminal case.

Click here to read the press release issued by the DOJ.

To view the antitrust complaint about this case on our website, click here.

You can read the state of Florida’s deal with FCS here.

To learn more, click here and read one of my prior blogs on a similar antitrust case.

Contact Health Care Attorneys Experienced in Negotiating and Evaluating Physician’s Complex Business Litigation, and Transactions

At the Health Law Firm, we provide legal services for health professionals and facilities. This includes physicians, medical groups, nurses, pharmacists, pharmacies, dentists, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, ambulatory surgical centers, pain management clinics, assisted living facilities, home health agencies, nursing homes, and any other health care provider.

The services we provide include representation in complex state and federal litigation, reviewing and negotiating contracts, preparing contracts, business transactions, professional license defense, opinion letters, representation in investigations, fair hearing defense, representation in peer review and clinical privileges hearings, litigation of restrictive covenant (covenants not to compete), Medicare and Medicaid audits, commercial litigation, and administrative hearings.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com

Sources:

Koenig, Bryan. “DOJ Cuts $100M Deal In Oncology Antitrust Probe.” Law360. (April 30, 2020). Web.

Office of Public Affairs. Press Release. “Leading Cancer Treatment Center Admits to Antitrust Crime and Agrees to Pay $100 Million Criminal Penalty.” U.S. Department of Justice. (April 30,2020). Web.

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and former registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

KeyWords: Noncompetition agreement litigation, representation for noncompetition agreements, noncompetition agreement litigation attorney, noncompetition agreement attorney, restrictive covenant attorney, representation for restrictive covenants, covenant-not-to-compete representation, health care litigation representation, representation for employer enforcement of restrictive covenants, representation for complex litigation, restrictive covenant defense attorney, complex healthcare litigation attorney, anti-trust legal counsel, physician employment agreements, health professional employment contracts, legal counsel for defeat of noncompetition agreement, physician employment contract litigation, health professional contracting, negotiating health business transactions, health care business contract attorney, health care professional contract litigation, healthcare complex business litigation, representation for physician agreements, representation for physician business transactions, representation for physician complex litigation, representation for antitrust, representation for healthcare facilities, oncologist defense, licensed oncologist defense lawyer, The Health Law Firm reviews, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

CO Board of Pharmacy Ordered to Give DEA Patient Data

Attorney Carole C. SchrieferBy Carole C. Schriefer, J.D.
On April 22, 2020, a federal judge ordered the Colorado Board of Pharmacy to give the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) prescription drug monitoring program data on two pharmacies that the DEA is investigating. The data includes patient identifying information of more than 14,000 patients. The state must turn over the data by May 15, 2020, according to the order.

Pharmacy Audits and Investigations.

Citing concerns about the two pharmacies’ handling of controlled-substance prescriptions, the DEA issued subpoenas under the Controlled Substances Act in 2019. The DEA requested the information as part of an investigation into whether the two unnamed pharmacies broke the law in dispensing opioids and other drugs.

Clash Over Patient Privacy & Data.

The DEA’s requested information is kept under the state’s Prescription Drug Monitoring Program or PDMP. For controlled-substance prescriptions, Colorado pharmacies and pharmacists are required by state law to report information that includes the names of patients, their doctors, and pharmacies.

Colorado state officials refused to release the data citing patient privacy concerns. The DEA’s “overly broad, undifferentiated demand for access would violate the Fourth Amendment right to privacy guaranteed to more than 14,000 patients whose medical data is at issue,” the state said.

According to the order, the Colorado statute allows the prescription-monitoring data to be disclosed but only to specific recipients including in response to law enforcement subpoenas. However, the state argued that the Colorado statute only applies to a “bona fide investigation of a specific individual.”

To read about a similar case involving a DEA investigation into pharmacy prescription practices, click here to read my prior blog.

The Decision.

U.S. District Judge Raymond P. Moore denied Colorado’s objections to the DEA’s subpoenas for the prescription data including patients’ information such as names, birth dates, and addresses. The judge said the DEA has shown that the requested information is relevant and needed for the ongoing investigation of the two pharmacies, and no warrant is needed to obtain it. The order directs the Colorado Board of Pharmacy and Patty Salazar, Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) to provide the data to the DEA no later than May 15, 2020.

To read the court’s order in full, click here.

For more information, click here to read the press release issued from the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Colorado.

States Must Act to Protect the Integrity of Such Programs.

State prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) were sold to pharmacists and physicians based on a promise that they were solely for the purpose of protecting patients from overdoses and preventing “doctor shopping” by dishonest, drug-seeking patients. Inherent in these programs was the promise that they would not be used for the purpose of prosecuting or charging physicians or pharmacists, in criminal proceedings or administrative proceedings, based on their contents. Most of the state laws that authorized the creation of PDMPs specifically forbid their use in such cases. This was required in order to get physicians and state medical societies to buy off on them.

Yet here we are. We see this over and over. the Federal government and federal agencies obtaining copies of these reports from the state and using them as direct evidence against physicians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, and pharmacies, despite the prohibition of the state statutes.

Moreover, not only does this subvert the purpose behind creating such databases, but then it runs afoul of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and similar provisions of most state constitutions. The doctor or pharmacist is required by law to report the prescriptions to the PDMP, but then the federal agency turns right around and uses it as evidence against the individual who reported it.

The feds take the position: “We do not care why you, the state, authorized it or what its purpose was supposed to be. If we want to take that information and use it for something else, something that was specifically prohibited by the state, then we will do it.”

Until state pharmacy associations and medical associations do something to tighten up the state legislation that created the PDMPs, this situation is not likely to change. The feds will continue to use the state PDMPs to prosecute and to take administrative actions to revoke the DEA registrations of physicians, pharmacists, pharmacies, and other health professionals.

Consult With A Health Law Attorney Experienced in the Representation of Pharmacists and Pharmacies.

We routinely provide legal representation to pharmacists, pharmacies, physicians and other health providers. We defend in state and federal administrative hearings, investigations, and litigation. We represent health professionals in formal and informal administrative hearings. We have a great deal of experience in defending against DEA actions.

The lawyers of The Health Law Firm are experienced in both formal and informal administrative hearings and in representing physicians, physician assistants and other health professionals in investigations and at Board of Pharmacy hearings. Call now or visit our website www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Zegers, Kelly. “Colo. Must Give DEA Pharmacy Data With Patient Info.” Law360. (April 20, 2020). Web.

Ingold, John. “Why the DEA is suing Colorado’s pharmacy board as part of an opioid investigation.” The Colorado Sun. (November 11, 2019). Web.

Pazanowski, Mary Ann. “Colorado Pharmacy Board Must Give DEA Patient-Identifying Info.” Bloomberg Law. (April 22, 2020). Web.

About the Authors: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and former registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456.

George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm. Its main office is in Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Avenue, Suite 1000, Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: DEA order to show cause (OSC) defense lawyer, legal representation for administrative hearings, DEA hearing defense attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, DEA order to show cause (OSC) defense attorney, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) defense attorney, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigation defense attorney, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) subpoena defense lawyer, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) inspection defense attorney, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) hearing defense attorney, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) order to show cause (OTSC) defense lawyer, DORA defense attorney, Department of Health defense attorney, Florida Board of Pharmacy defense legal representation, legal defense for pharmacists, pharmacist defense lawyer, board of pharmacy defense lawyer, board of pharmacy hearing legal representation, pharmacy license disciplinary charges defense attorney, legal representation for pharmacist, legal representation for pharmacy, pharmacy defense lawyer, pharmacy audit defense representation, pharmacy audit defense attorney, board representation for pharmacists, board representation for pharmacies, board representation for physicians, board of pharmacy investigation representation, legal representation for board investigations, The Health Law Firm, administrative hearing defense attorney

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By |2020-06-03T14:53:03-04:00June 10th, 2020|Categories: Colorado Health Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

Government Deems Marijuana Dispensaries ‘Essential’ During COVID-19 Shutdowns

By Carole C. Schriefer, J.D.
On March 17, 2020, amid Coronavirus shutdowns, multiple cities and state health departments have declared medical marijuana dispensaries essential to health care. Many cities are closing or considering closing business and retail operations to stop the spread of the virus. Other “essential” businesses that will remain open include pharmacies, grocery stores, and financial institutions.
As of this date (3/23/2020), Florida still has not joined the ones declaring them to be essential.


“Marijuana is Essential Medicine for Many.”

After residents were told to stay home, a number of cities, including Colorado, revised their position in other states and deemed cannabis “an essential medicine,” allowing stores to stay open. Read Colorado’s Essential Business Order and Public Health guidance.

San Fransico’s Mayor London Breed announced adjustments to the city’s public health order clarifying that dispensaries and marijuana deliveries are critical. “In terms of the cannabis dispensaries, the Department of Public Health [in California] today clarified that since cannabis has medical uses, dispensaries will be allowed to operate as essential businesses, just as pharmacies are allowed to do,” she added.

According to the New York State Department of Health, “In the event nonessential businesses are forced to shut down due to COVID-19, registered organizations in the medical marijuana program will be considered essential and allowed to remain open because they are considered medical providers.” Read the guidance issued by the state of New York.

Following right along, Illinois’ Department of Financial and Professional Regulation issued new, temporary guidelines, relaxing where medical marijuana sales can take place in order to “help reduce contact between individuals.” The state will allow medical dispensaries to sell cannabis “on the dispensary’s property or on a public walkway or curb adjacent to the dispensary.”  Read the temporary guidance issued by Illinois.

In addition, other states, such as Michigan, Massachusetts, and Washington have issued bulletins relaxing regulations regarding delivery and in-store transactions in order to limit contact between patients and vendors.

What Will Florida Do?

The question is, will Florida and other states continue to follow suit if necessary? On March 16, 2020, Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis enacted Emergency Order 20-002 to temporarily allow qualified physicians to use telemedicine. However, so far, there has not been any guidance issued specifically on medical marijuana dispensaries. View Florida’s Emergency Order 20-002.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys for Medical and Recreational Marijuana Concerns.

The Health Law Firm attorneys can assist health care providers and facilities, such as doctors, pharmacists, and pharmacies, wanting to participate in the medical marijuana industry. We can properly help to complete and submit the applications for renewals, registration, permitting, and/or licensing, complying with Florida law. We also represent health facilities, health clinics, and pharmacies facing proceedings brought by state regulators or agencies.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Booker, Brakkton. “Amid Coronavirus, San Francisco, New York, Deem Marijuana Businesses ‘Essential’.” NPR. (March 17, 2020). Web.

Reisman, Sam. “Medical Pot Deemed ‘Essential’ Amid COVID-19 Shutdowns.” Law360. (March 17, 2020). Web.

Smith, Jeff. “Medical cannabis businesses increasingly deemed ‘essential’ during coronavirus pandemic.” Med Biz Daily. (March 18, 2020). Web.

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and former registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

KeyWords: Florida medical marijuana center regulations and legislation, Florida medical marijuana treatment center representation, medical marijuana regulation attorney, medical marijuana lawyer, legal representation for medical marijuana issues, Florida health care business application attorney, health law defense attorney, health lawyers for marijuana distributors in Florida and Colorado, legal counsel for marijuana growers and distributors in Florida and Colorado, Florida health facility legal representation, Florida health facility defense attorney, health facility defense lawyer in Florida and Colorado, The Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm Attorneys, Florida and Colorado administrative hearing defense legal representation, administrative hearing defense attorney in Colorado and Florida, administrative hearing defense lawyer in Florida and Colorado, Florida and Colorado medical administrative regulation attorney, formal administrative hearing defense attorney in Colorado and Florida

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Is Exposure to COVID-19 for Health Care Professionals, Covered as Employment-Related Injury For Workers Comp?

Attorney Amanda I. ForbesBy Amanda I. Forbes, J.D. and Carole C. Schriefer, J.D.
In answering the question posed in the title of this blog, first, it should be noted that the World Health Organization (WHO) classifies COVID-19 as an “occupational disease.”  (Reference:  World Health Organization, “Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Outbreak: Rights, Roles and Responsibilities Of Health Workers. . . .”) Click here to view the classification by the WHO on our website.

Most state workers’ compensation laws cover the worker for occupational diseases if the worker acquires it during the course and scope of their employment.
For example, Section 440.151(2), Florida Statutes, states:

Whenever used in this section the term “occupational disease” shall be construed to mean only a disease which is due to causes and conditions which are characteristic of and peculiar to a particular trade, occupation, process, or employment, and to exclude all ordinary diseases of life to which the general public is exposed, unless the incidence of the disease is substantially higher in the particular trade, occupation, process, or employment than for the general public. “Occupational disease” means only a disease for which there are epidemiological studies showing that exposure to the specific substance involved, at the levels to which the employee was exposed, may cause the precise disease sustained by the employee.

Section 440.151(2), Florida Statutes, (emphasis added).  Many other states have similar requirements to those of Florida.

Healthcare workers are at the front line of any outbreak response and as such are exposed to hazards that put them at an increased risk of infection with the COVID-19 virus.  Therefore, as COVID-19 meets the criteria as an “occupational disease.”

Moreover, Section 440.151(1)(a), Florida Statutes, states:

Where the employer and employee are subject to the provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Law, the disablement or death of an employee resulting from an occupational disease as hereinafter defined shall be treated as the happening of an injury by accident, notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, and the employee or, in case of death, the employee’s dependents shall be entitled to compensation as provided by this chapter, except as hereinafter otherwise provided; and the practice and procedure prescribed by this chapter shall apply to all proceedings under this section, except as hereinafter otherwise provided.  Provided, however, that in no case shall an employer be liable for compensation under the provisions of this section unless such disease has resulted from the nature of the employment in which the employee was engaged under such employer, was actually contracted while so engaged, and the nature of the employment was the major contributing cause of the disease. Major contributing cause must be shown by medical evidence only, as demonstrated by physical examination findings and diagnostic testing. “Nature of the employment” means that in the occupation in which the employee was so engaged there is attached a particular hazard of such disease that distinguishes it from the usual run of occupations, or the incidence of such disease is substantially higher in the occupation in which the employee was so engaged than in the usual run of occupations. In claims for death under s. 440.16, death must occur within 350 weeks after last exposure. Both causation and sufficient exposure to a specific harmful substance shown to be present in the workplace to support causation shall be proven by clear and convincing evidence.

Section 440.151(1)(a), Florida Statutes.

It is important to note that COVID 19 or any other communicable disease (TB, H1N1, etc.):  The employee has to test positive for the disease/contagion and it must be determined with a reasonable amount of certainty that their exposure to the virus occurred in the workplace and was not community-acquired.

In addition,  per Section 440.151(1)(c), Florida Statutes states:

Where an occupational disease is aggravated by any other disease or infirmity, not itself compensable, or where disability or death from any other cause, not itself compensable, is aggravated, prolonged, accelerated or in anywise contributed to by an occupational disease, the compensation shall be payable only if the occupational disease is the major contributing cause of the injury. Any compensation shall be reduced and limited to such proportion only of the compensation that would be payable if the occupational disease were the sole cause of the disability or death as such occupational disease, as a causative factor, bears to all the causes of such disability or death, such reduction in compensation to be effected by reducing the number of weekly or monthly payments or the amounts of such payments, as under the circumstances of the particular case may be for the best interest of the claimant or claimants. Major contributing cause must be demonstrated by medical evidence based on physical examination findings and diagnostic testing.

Section 440.151(1)(c), Florida Statutes, (emphasis added).

With regard to emergency medical technicians (EMTs) or paramedics Section 440.09(3), Florida Statutes, states:

If an emergency medical technician or paramedic is appointed or employed full time by a municipality, the state, or any political subdivision, is certified under chapter 401.23, in an emergency situation in this state, any such activities would be considered to be within the course of his or her employment and an emergency medical technician or paramedic and covered by the employer’s jurisdiction or area of responsibility, such activities are considered to be within the course of employment. The provisions of this subsection do not apply if the emergency medical technician or paramedic is performing activities for which he or she is paid by another employer of contractor.

Section 440.09(3), Florida Statutes (emphasis added).

Workers Compensation Benefits for Healthcare Professionals.

As of March 26, 2020, Florida has not issued any order or legislation explicitly stating that healthcare professionals exposed to COVID-19 will be entitled to Workers Compensation benefits.

By way of example, In the City of Phila. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Sites), 889 A.2d 129 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005), a claimant was successful in proving that his hepatitis C was caused by his exposure to blood that occurred while working as a firefighter and emergency medical technician  (EMT).  Similar to COVID-19, hepatitis C was also classified as a compensable “occupational disease.”  Therefore, it is likely that a healthcare professional’s exposure to COVID-19 would result in a-viable workers’ compensation claim.

Federal workers’ compensation laws are similar to those quoted above. Therefore, federal health care providers and those working in federal facilities will also most probably be entitled to federal employment compensation (FECA) benefits under similar situations.

We want to emphasize that this is merely our preliminary opinion based on limited analysis and research.  It is provided for informational purposes only. It does not constitute the provision of legal advice.  Each state has different workers’ compensation laws and different case law, as does the federal government. Each individual set of circumstances may be different. Contact your local workers’ compensation plaintiff’s (claimant’s) attorney for advice and representation in your individual case.

For more information and more examples of employment compensation benefit cases for health care professionals, click here.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Health Care Professionals and Providers.

At the Health Law Firm, we provide legal services for all health care providers and professionals.  This includes physicians, nurses, dentists, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, Durable Medical Equipment suppliers, medical students and interns, hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, pain management clinics, nursing homes, and any other healthcare provider. It also includes medical students, resident physicians, and fellows, as well as medical student professors and clinical staff. We represent facilities, individuals, groups and institutions in contracts, sales, mergers, and acquisitions. The lawyers of The Health Law Firm are experienced in complex litigation and both formal and informal administrative hearings. We also represent physicians accused of wrongdoing, in patient complaints and in Department of Health investigations.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.ThehealthLawFirm.com.

About the Authors:  Amanda I. Forbes, J.D., and Carole C. Schriefer J.D., practice health law with The Health Law Firm in its Altamonte Springs, Florida, office.  Its main office is in Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.  The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave. Suite 1000, Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By |2020-04-16T12:27:13-04:00April 16th, 2020|Categories: Colorado Health Law Blog|0 Comments

Finding a Healthcare Providers Service Organization (HPSO) Insurance Attorney to Defend you in a Complaint Against Your Pharmacist or Pharmacy License

Carole C. SchrieferBy Carole C. Schriefer, J.D.
Many pharmacists or their pharmacies carry professional malpractice insurance through Healthcare Providers Service Organization (HPSO) or one of the other similar professional liability insurance companies. What they may not realize is that this insurance will pay for their legal defense expenses if there is a complaint filed against their pharmacist license or the pharmacy’s license. It will also pay for legal defense expenses if they receive a subpoena for records, if they are required to attend a deposition, or if they are accused of violating HIPAA or a client’s medical confidentiality.

Under this type of policy, the insurance company will pay the legal fees and other costs related to your defense or legal representation. However, you will be required to locate and retain the appropriate attorney to represent you in the matter.

What to Look For When Retaining an Attorney to Defend You.

1. The primary qualification for any attorney you hire to represent you should be his or her experience in working with health professionals in the same field. If the attorney is not familiar with your area of health practice, with the type of legal proceeding you have, or with your professional licensing board, it may be difficult for that attorney to represent you properly.

2. If consult with an attorney who states that she or he will help you make a statement to the investigator or assist you in the investigation, but will not agree to appear and represent you in hearings, then this is the wrong attorney. You need an attorney that can represent you from start to finish.

3. Seek and retain an attorney who accepts the insurance that you have, whether it is HPSO Insurance, CPH & Associates Insurance, Philadelphia Insurance, Pharmacist Mutual Insurance Company (PMIC), Trust Management Services, Philadelphia Insurance, Firemans Fund, or another national company. This will ensure that you have an attorney who will give you the lower rates the insurance company has negotiated and will have a good working relationship established with your insurance company. If an attorney with our firm cannot represent you, we will try to find you an attorney who will.

4. You also want to retain the services of an attorney who has appeared before your professional board or professional licensing authority in investigations and hearings, especially in formal administrative hearings.

5. Often you will come across an attorney who only wants you to accept a consent order, stipulation, or settlement agreement. Remember that these are all merely plea bargains and you will be pleading guilty to whatever offenses are charged. This is teh easy way out and often the easy way is not the right way. IF you plead guilty then, from that point on, you are guilty. In most cases, however, you will actually be innocent of the charges and will need a formal administrative hearing in order to prove this.

6. You don’t necessarily need an attorney who resides in your city, state, or location. Almost all the work on the case will be done by telephone and e-mail. You usually have only one meeting or hearing and, depending on what type of hearing it is, it could be located in many different locations. Our attorneys will travel to those locations for meetings and hearings.

7. Beware of attorneys who hold themselves out in Internet advertising as health attorneys or professional license defense attorneys but are really some other type of attorneys. We see this a lot from medical malpractice attorneys, criminal defense attorneys and attorneys who sue insurance companies. Be sure you get an attorney who concentrates his or her practice in defending those in the specialty of pharmacy and in board of pharmacy complaints, investigations, and hearings.

8. If you can’t find an attorney to meet your immediate needs through our firm or an Internet search, you may contact your insurance company or professional association and ask if they have a list of attorneys that can do the legal work you require.

For example, you may reach Healthcare Providers Service Organization (HPSO) at (800) 982-9491; you can reach Nurses Service Organization (NSO) at (800) 247-1500; you can reach CPH & Associates at (800) 875-1911 or (312) 987-9823; you can reach Pharmacists Mutual Insurance Company (PMIC) at (800) 247-5930.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced Investigations of Pharmacists and Pharmacies.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to pharmacists, pharmacies, prescribing physicians, dispensing physicians and nurse practitioners, and other health providers in pharmacy board complaints and investigations, Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Colorado DORA investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigations, Medicare and Medicaid audits, Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU) investigations, and other types of investigations of health professionals and providers. To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

In cases in which the health care professional has professional liability insurance or general liability insurance which provides coverage for such matters, we will seek to obtain coverage by your insurance company and will attempt to have your legal fees and expenses covered by your insurance company. If allowed, we will agree to take an assignment of your insurance policy proceeds in order to be able to submit our bills directly to your insurance company.

We also defend health professionals and health facilities in general litigation matters and business litigation matters.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and former registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

KeyWords: Healthcare Providers Service Organization (HPSO) Insurance defense attorney, HPSO defense lawyer, Florida HPSO defense attorney lawyer, Colorado HPSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for HPSO matters in Colorado, legal representation for HPSO matters in Florida, representation for professional liability insurance cases, Louisiana HPSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for HPSO matters in Louisiana, HPSO deposition defense coverage, representation for licensed mental health counselors (LMHCs), pharmacist defense lawyer, pharmacy defense attorney lawyer, medical prescriber legal representation, pharmacist complaint cases, pharmacy complaint cases, Florida Colorado Louisiana pharmacy complaint cases, defense lawyer for pharmacists, Florida health law defense attorney, medical license defense, Florida Department of Health (DOH) attorney, representation for Louisiana and Florida Department of Health (DOH) complaint investigations, Louisiana and Florida Department of Health (DOH) defense lawyer, Colorado Division of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) defense attorney, representation for Florida Colorado Division of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) complaint investigations, Colorado Division of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) defense lawyer, Lousiana LPC Board defense attorney lawyer, Board of Pharmacy defense, Board of Pharmacy complaints, representation for Board of Pharmacy investigations, Florida Board of Pharmacy defense lawyer, Colorado Board of Pharmacy defense lawyer, Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys, administrative complaint defense lawyer, administrative complaint defense attorney, administrative hearing defense lawyer, administrative hearing defense attorney, administrative hearing defense legal counsel, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigation defense attorney lawyer, Medicare and Medicaid audit defense attorney lawyer, Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU) investigation defnse attorney lawyer

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By |2020-02-04T16:56:51-05:00February 4th, 2020|Categories: Colorado Health Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

Nursing Student Claims Sexual Harassment, Retaliation in Lawsuit Filed Against North Carolina Lawsuit

Attorney Carole C. Schriefer Headshot By Carole C. Schriefer, R.N., J.D.
On November 29, 2019, a former University of North Carolina nursing student sued the school’s Greensboro campus, saying it improperly dismissed from her a program a month before graduation. She filed two separate suits. She claims she was forced to endure sexual harassment as a student for years. Then, when she accused a supervisor of misconduct, she was gradually pushed out of the nursing program, according to the lawsuit.

She is suing the University of North Carolina’s Greensboro nursing department in state court and UNC’s Board of Directors along with the Raleigh School of Nurse Anesthesia in federal court.

Lawsuit Describes Alleged Sexual Harassment, Retaliation.

According to the suit, the harassment began less than a year after she enrolled in the Doctor of Nursing Program at UNCG in August 2015, with hopes of becoming a nurse anesthesiologist. She was put under the supervision of a male certified registered nurse anesthetist, or CRNA. In her suit, she alleges that her supervisor began acting inappropriately almost immediately.

When she reported the harassment in July 2016, that’s when the retaliation started, claims the lawsuit. “They started trying to find things,” she reportedly said. She claims that one supervisor told her “If I can’t get you for this, I can get you for something else.” A few months later, on October 31, 2016, she states she was given additional clinical work and reassigned to work with the same CRNA she had previously reported for harassment, according to court documents.

In June 2018, a month before she was to graduate, she was dismissed from the program for what the school said were unsafe nursing practices. She appealed and UNCG allowed her to re-enroll in January 2019 for a tuition of $10,000. However, a month later, she was dismissed again for unsafe nursing practices. UNCG then refused any further appeals and upheld her dismissal in May 2019.

The nursing student is seeking unspecified damages, including loss of income and repayment of tuition, according to the lawsuit.

To read one of my prior blogs on a similar case dealing with a harassment lawsuit at Rutgers University, click here.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys Representing Medical Students, Residents and Fellows.

The Health Law Firm routinely represents medical students, residents, and fellows who run into difficulties and have disputes with their medical schools or programs. We also represent other health providers in investigations, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, inspections, and audits involving the DEA, Department of Health (DOH) and other law enforcement agencies. Its attorneys include those who are board-certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law as well as licensed health professionals who are also attorneys.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

“Lawsuit describes harassment, retaliation at UNCG nursing school.” Greensboro News & Record. (December 3, 2019). Web.

Waggoner, Martha. “Lawsuit describes harassment, retaliation at Nursing School.” The Washington Post. (December 3, 2019). Web.

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

KeyWords: Legal representation for nursing students, legal representation for nurse practice students, legal representation for nurse anesthetist students, nursing student attorney, nurse practice attorney, nurse anesthetist student attorney, nursing student legal counsel, nurse practice legal counsel, nurse anesthetist legal counsel, education law attorney for health professionals, education law legal counsel for health professional students, education law lawyer for health professional students academic review hearing attorney, nursing board defense attorney, nursing board defense legal representation, nursing school attorney, nursing school lawyer, nursing school legal counsel, nursing school legal defense counsel, legal dispute with nursing school, legal representation for CRNAs, attorney for CRNAs, lawyer for CRNAs, The Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys, board of nursing legal defense counsel, board of nursing defense lawyer, board of nursing defense attorney

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Finding an HPSO Attorney to Defend you in a Complaint Against Your Mental Health Counselor or Social Workers License

Attorney Carole C. Schriefer HeadshotBy Carole C. Schriefer, R.N., J.D.
Many licensed mental health counselors (LMHCs), licensed clinical social workers (LCSWs), Licensed Marriage and Family Therapists (LMFT), and other mental health professionals carry professional malpractice insurance through Healthcare Providers Service Organization (HPSO) or one of the many other insurance companies. What they may not realize is that their insurance will pay for their legal defense expenses if there is a complaint filed against their license, they receive a subpoena, or they are accused of violating HIPAA or a client’s medical confidentiality.

Under such policies, the insurance company will pay the legal fees and other costs related to your defense. However, you will be required to locate and retain the appropriate attorney to represent you in the matter.

What to Look For When Retaining an Attorney to Defend You.

1. The primary qualification for any attorney you hire to represent you should be her experience in working with health professionals in the same field. If the attorney is not familiar with your area of health practice, it may be difficult for that attorney to get up to speed to represent you properly.

2. If you come across an attorney who states that he or she will help you make a statement or assist you in the investigation, but does not appear in hearings, then this is the wrong attorney. You need an attorney that can represent you from start to finish.

3. Seek and retain an attorney who accepts the insurance that you have, whether it is HPSO Insurance, CPH & Associates Insurance, Philadelphia Insurance, Trust Management Services, or another national company. This will ensure that you have an attorney who will give you the lower rates the insurance company had negotiated and will have a good working relationship established with your insurance company. If an attorney with our firm cannot represent you, we will try to find an attorney who will.

4. You also want to retain the services of an attorney who has appeared before your professional board or professional licensing authority in investigations and hearings, especially formal administrative hearings.

5. Often you will come across an attorney who only wants you to accept a consent order, stipulation, or settlement agreement. Remember that these are all merely plea bargains and you will be pleading guilty to whatever offenses are charged. In most cases, you will be innocent and need a formal administrative hearing in order to prove this.

6. You don’t necessarily need an attorney in your city, state, or location. Almost all the work on the case will be done by telephone and e-mail. You usually have only one meeting or hearing and, depending on what type of hearing it is, it could be located in many different locations. Our attorneys will travel to those locations for meetings and hearings.

7. Beware of attorneys who hold themselves out in Internet advertising as health attorneys or professional license defense attorneys but are really some other type of attorneys. We see this a lot from medical malpractice attorneys and criminal defense attorneys. Be sure you get an attorney that concentrates his or her practice in defending those in your specialty board complaints, investigations and hearings.

8. If you can’t find an attorney to meet your immediate needs through an Internet search, you may contact your insurance company or professional association and ask if they have a list of attorneys that can do the legal work you require.

For example, you may reach Healthcare Providers Service Organization at (800) 982-9491; you can reach Nurses Service Organization (NSO) at (800) 247-1500; you can reach CPH & Associates at (800) 875-1911 or (312) 987-9823. You can also access a list of professional license defense attorneys online at https://taana.org/referral/.

To learn more about finding an HPSO attorney to defend you in such matters, click here to read one of my prior blogs.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced Investigations of Mental Health Counselors, Psychologists, Social Workers and Family Therapists.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to mental health counselors, psychologists, social workers, and family therapists in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, FBI investigations and other types of investigations of health professionals and providers. To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

In cases in which the health care professional has professional liability insurance or general liability insurance which provides coverage for such matters, we will seek to obtain coverage by your insurance company and will attempt to have your legal fees and expenses covered by your insurance company. If allowed, we will agree to take an assignment of your insurance policy proceeds in order to be able to submit our bills directly to your insurance company.

We also defend health professionals and health facilities in general litigation matters and business litigation matters.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

KeyWords: Healthcare Providers Service Organization (HPSO) Insurance defense attorney, HPSO lawyer, representation for HPSO matters, representation for professional liability insurance cases, representation for licensed mental health counselors (LMHCs), mental health counselor defense lawyer, mental health counselor representation, social worker defense lawyer, representation for social workers, social worker defense attorney, social worker complaint cases, mental health counselor complaint cases, defense lawyer for psychologists, Florida health law defense attorney, medical license defense, Florida Department of Health (DOH) attorney, representation for DOH investigations, DOH defense lawyer, representation for Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) investigation, AHCA complaint defense, administrative complaint lawyer, administrative complaint defense, administrative hearings defense, representation for health care professionals, representation for doctors, representation for nurses, The Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Hospital Countersues FCA Whistleblower for Failing to Report Information Internally

Carole C. SchrieferBy Carole C. Schriefer, R.N., J.D.
On March 13, 2019, a West Virginia hospital facing a whistleblower lawsuit countersued a former employee who filed the False Claims Act (FCA) lawsuit against the health system. Wheeling Hospital alleges that the former executive, who is the whistleblower/relator in the lawsuit, breached his fiduciary duty to the company by failing to report the unlawful conduct internally, first. Instead, he used the information as the basis for his whistleblower claim. In the countersuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, the Hospital accuses the former executive-turned-whistleblower of attempting to ‘extort a settlement’ and filing the FCA whistleblower suit as an act of revenge.

The Whistleblower’s Complaint.

The whistleblower, a former accountant, and senior executive at Wheeling Hospital, was discharged in August 2015. In December 2017, he filed a complaint under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA). He alleged the hospital violated the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) by paying kickbacks to physicians for patient referrals to the Hospital. Based on this, it is alleged, the claims for the services the hospital provided to the referred patients were false claims, subject to recoupment by the government.

The Hospital’s Countersuit.

In an unusual strategy, the Hospital filed a counter-suit against the whistleblower, alleging that he breached his fiduciary duty to the Hospital and abused the legal process. The Hospital’s case asserts that instead of carrying out his duty to the Hospital, instead, he capitalized on his alleged knowledge of the conduct to “extort a settlement” through a “false and frivolous” FCA suit as an act of revenge.

Additionally, the Hospital alleges that “at no time during his employment, or in his role as a partner at Deloitte, did he report any suspicions of fraud or violations of federal regulations to Wheeling Hospital’s compliance officer.”

You can read Wheeling Hospital’s countersuit against the whistleblower on our website in full.

The Significance of This Case: Unique Defense Strategy for Defending a Whistleblower Suit.

This case shows a unique, but legally valid, defense strategy that might be used in other future whistleblower cases. Often the information about false claims is produced by a high-ranking hospital or institutional employees whose job duties may have required them to report what they knew to the company as part of their job. The company should then have the opportunity to investigate and correct any improper billing or other misconduct that an errant employee might be carrying out on his own. By failing to do this, the employee may breach his duties to the company, may violate his employment contract, and may be subject to a suit or counter-suit over this. To the extent that the actions of the ex-employee cause the employer damages, the employer may be entitled to indemnification from the ex-employee.

However, the other side of the story is when an employee does make his or her superiors aware of suspected misconduct and false claims within the company and the company does nothing about it. This is often the case that we have when potential blowers contact us about filing a False Claims Act case. Often the whistleblower attempts to do the right thing by reporting it within the company and is stymied by his or her superiors. To us, this opens the door to legitimate whistleblower suits.

To read one of my prior blogs about South Florida Hospital reaching a settlement for similar FCA
claims, click here.

Click here to learn more about who can file a whistleblower/qui tam lawsuit and the reward programs for coming forward with a false claim.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Qui Tam or Whistleblower Cases.

Attorneys with The Health Law Firm represent physicians, nurses and other health professionals who desire to file a False Claims Act (whistleblower or qui tam) case. However, the attorneys of The Health Law Firm also defend physicians, medical groups and health facilities that have been sued in False Claims Act (whistleblower or qui tam) cases or have had administrative or civil complaints filed against them to recover civil monetary penalties. We have developed relationships with recognized experts in health care accounting, health care financing, utilization review, medical review, filling, coding, and other services that assist us in such matters. We have represented doctors, nurses and others as relators in bringing qui tam or whistleblower cases, as well.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Pearlman, Steve and Freeman, Meika. “Top 10 Whistleblowing And Retaliation Events Of The Year.” Law360. (December 20, 2019). Web.

Goldberg, Pinchos. “Hospital Sues Whistleblower for Failing to Report Information And Choosing Instead to Use As Basis for Claim.” JD Supra. (May 8, 2019). Web.

Commins, John. “HOSPITAL COUNTERSUES FALSE CLAIMS WHISTLEBLOWER.” Health Leaders. (May 9, 2019). Web.

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

Keywords: Florida health law attorney, whistleblower attorney, whistleblower defense lawyer, Florida health law defense attorney, whistleblower defense attorney, whistleblower defense legal counsel, legal representation for whistleblower cases, qui tam lawyer, health law attorney, qui tam defense lawyer, qui tam plaintiff lawyer, whistleblower legal representation, False Claims Act lawyer, False Claims Act attorney, False Claims Act legal counsel, The Health Law Firm, DOJ defense lawyer, Office of Inspector General (OIG) defense counsel, Office of Inspector General (OIG) defense attorney, Office of Inspector General (OIG) legal representation, medcila legal defense attorney, health care fraud attorney, health care fraud lawyer, attorney legal representation for qui tam cases, Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) attorney, Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) lawyer, Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) defense counsel, Medicare fraud defense lawyer attorney, Medicare fraud legal representation, Medicaid fraud defense lawyer attorney, legal representation for Medicare and Medicaid fraud, legal representation for Stark Law violations, healthcare fraud defense attorney, whistle blower lawyer attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, Florida qui tam whistle blower lawyer attorney, Colorado qui tam whistle blower lawyer attorney, Louisiana qui tam whistle blower lawyer attorney, Kentucky qui tam whistle blower lawyer attorney, Virginia qui tam whistle blower lawyer attorney, District of Columbia (D.C.) qui tam whistle blower lawyer attorney, civil monetary penalties lawyer attorney, Colorado False Claims Act (FCA) and civil monetary penalties lawyer, Louisiana False Claims Act (FCA) and civil monetary penalties attorney, Kentucky False Claims Act (FCA) and civil monetary penalties lawyer attorney legal counsel, Virginia False Claims Act (FCA) and civil monetary penalties lawyer attorney, Virginia whistleblower lawyer attorney, District of Columbia (D.C.) False Claims Act (FCA) and civil monetary penalties lawyer attorney, civil monetary penalties lawyer attorney

The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999, and is also a registered service mark.
Copyright © 2019/2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved

By |2019-12-30T20:53:58-05:00December 30th, 2019|Categories: Colorado Health Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

Florida Doc Charged in Largest Medicare Scheme Ever Reported Involving Genetic Testing

By Carole C. Schriefer, R.N., J.D.
On October 1, 2019, a Florida doctor was implicated in what federal investigators say is one of the largest health care fraud schemes ever charged. According to prosecutors, the doctor allegedly authorized genetic testing for patients he never met, in a state where he’s not licensed to practice.

The vast fraud scheme totaled $2.1 billion worth of false Medicare and Medicaid claims between July 2018 and January 2019. The physician is being charged in the United States District Court of New Jersey with conspiracy to commit health care fraud.

Alleged Fraudulent Genetic Testing.

Thirty-five separate defendants are now facing felony charges for their alleged participation in one of the largest health care fraud schemes ever investigated and charged. All defendants involved were somehow associated with telemedicine companies and cancer genetic testing laboratories, according to a Department of Justice (DOJ) news release. Click here to read the DOJ press release in full and learn more about the case and all the defendants being charged.

According to the release, one of the defendants, the Florida doctor, submitted fraudulent orders for genetic tests to numerous clinical laboratories. He allegedly authorized his signature on patient documents to order tests for patients he had never met, seen, treated or evaluated. Additionally, according to an indictment filed by the District Court of New Jersey, this physician received about $5,000 a month for his role as Privy Health Lab’s medical director in Illinois. During this period, according to prosecutors, he falsely reported himself as the patients’ ordering physician so that he could sign orders for the genetic testing. In 2018 alone, Medicare paid clinical laboratories at least $4.6 million for genetic tests that he allegedly ordered in this manner.

The Gainesville doctor faces charges of conspiracy to commit healthcare fraud following an investigation by the DOJ, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of the Inspector General (OIG), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

To learn about a similar case of healthcare fraud dealing with genetic testing, click here to read part one and here to read part two of my blog series on a prior scam.

Innocent until Proven Guilty in a Court of Law.

We are writing this blog from information from several different media sources including those referenced below and a DOJ press release. It must be remembered that just as is consistently stated in the “Bad Boys” television series, “the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.”

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Health Care Fraud and Qui Tam or Whistleblower Cases.

The Health Law Firm’s attorneys routinely represent physicians, medical practices, clinical labs, dentists, orthodontists, medical groups, clinics, pharmacies, assisted living facilities (ALfs), home health care agencies, nursing homes, group homes and other healthcare providers in Medicaid and Medicare investigations, audits and recovery actions.

Attorneys with The Health Law Firm also represent health care professionals and others who may desire to file a qui tam, False Claims Act or whistleblower suit. We work with physicians, nurses and other professionals to investigate, document and file such cases. We have developed relationships with recognized experts in health care accounting, health care financing, utilization review, medical review, filling, coding and other services that assist us in such matters. We have represented several doctors and other licensed health professionals as relators in bringing qui tam or whistleblower cases. Our attorneys are also available to defend physicians, medical groups and health care providers in qui tam or whistleblower cases.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Mavrakis, Emily. “Gainesville doctor charged for fraud over genetic testing.” The Gainesville Sun. (October 1, 2019). Web.

Villegas, Brianda. “Gainesville doctor charged in federal health care fraud case.” WCJB TV20. (October 1, 2019). Web.

U.S. Department of Justice, Press Release dated September 26, 2019, (https://www.justice.gov/usao-nj/pr/federal-health-care-fraud-takedown-northeastern-us-results-54-defendants-charged-and)

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

KeyWords: Healthcare fraud representation, healthcare fraud lawyer, healthcare fraud defense attorney, Whistle blower plaintiff-relator attorney, Qui tam suit plaintiff-relator attorney, False Claims Act suit plaintiff-relator attorney, Medicare audit defense attorney, Medicare audit defense legal representation, Medicare audit defense lawyer, Tricare audit defense attorney, Tricare audit defense legal representation, Tricare audit defense lawyer, Medicaid audit defense attorney, Medicaid audit defense legal representation, Medicaid audit defense lawyer, Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU) defense attorney, Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU) defense legal representation, Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU) defense lawyer, Medicare overpayment demand defense attorney, Medicare overpayment demand defense legal representation, Medicare overpayment demand defense lawyer, Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigation defense attorney, Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigation defense legal representation, Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigation defense lawyer, Civil Monetary Penalty defense attorney, Civil Monetary Penalty defense legal representation, Civil Monetary Penalty defense lawyer, Whistle blower suit defense attorney, Whistle blower suit defense legal representation, Whistle blower suit defense lawyer, Qui tam suit defense attorney, Qui Tam suit defense legal representation, Qui tam suit defense lawyer, False Claims Act suit defense attorney, False Claims Act suit defense legal representation, False Claims Act suit defense lawyer, representation for allegations of overbilling, representation for FCA investigations, Office of Inspector General (OIG) interview defense attorney, Office of Inspector General (OIG) interview defense legal representation, Office of Inspector General (OIG) interview defense lawyer, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2019 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By |2019-12-05T20:30:00-05:00December 5th, 2019|Categories: Colorado Health Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

Doctor Sentenced to 40 Years For Alleged Interstate Pill Mill

By Carole C. Schriefer, R.N., J.D.

On October 2, 2019, a physician in Virginia received a 40-year prison sentence for illegally prescribing more than half a million opioid pills over 19 months. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia handed down the sentence to Joel Smithers, who reportedly operated a “pill mill” out of Virginia, according to authorities. In addition to prison time, he was given an $86,000 fine and will serve three years of supervised release upon the completion of his prison time, according to court documents.

The sentence is lighter than it could have been. He was facing up to life in prison and a fine of more than $200 million, according to officials at the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ). Click here to view the court’s sentencing document in full.

The Alleged Interstate Pill Mill Operation.

In May 2019, Smithers was convicted by a jury on more than 859 federal drug charges, including one count of possessing with the intent to distribute controlled substances and one count of maintaining a place for the purpose of unlawfully distributing controlled substances. Additionally, he was convicted on hundreds of counts of unlawfully distributing a controlled substance without a legitimate medical purpose or beyond the bounds of medical practice.

When he opened his Virginia practice in 2015, officials said he prescribed controlled substances to “every patient in his practice, resulting in over 500,000 Schedule II controlled substances being distributed.” Authorities say that he allegedly ran an operation that was less a medical practice and more an interstate drug distribution network.

Smithers was able to rake in over $700,000 in cash and credit card payments before the search warrant was executed at his office on March 7, 2017. Click here to read the press release issued by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Western District of Virginia.

To learn about a similar case involving two Florida doctors, click here.


The Problems I See in This Case.

I tell you that I take issue with many of the cases of this sort. I do not know enough about the actual facts of this physician’s case, but I can comment generally based on other similar cases I have had in the past. The government, both state and federal, has come down like a hammer on individual physicians and pharmacists in its over-zealous campaign to crack down on opioids. Many physicians and pharmacists, just trying to do a good job and legitimately treat their patients, are being caught up and persecuted. Chronic pain patients, many of whom are disabled veterans or people injured on the job, are unable to find physicians to treat them anymore or, if they can, any pharmacists willing to fill their prescriptions.

All sorts of under-handed techniques are used to try to make a case against conscientious health professionals who are merely trying to do their jobs. These do include the tactic seen in the case we are reporting on, which I call “bean counting.” The government comes in and, instead of proving how many allegedly illegal prescriptions were written or how many patients the physician gave the prescriptions to, breaks these out into the number of pills. This greatly exaggerates the case and these large numbers alone make it look like the doctor (or pharmacist) is doing something wrong or extremely way out of the norm.

For example, if a patient was receiving a low dose of a pain killer, say 10 mg Oxycodone every 4 to 6 hours, prescribed for four times a day, the ordinary monthly prescription for this medication alone (and such patients rarely receive one type of medication alone) this equates to 120 pills per month. If 10 mg pills are not available and/or the prescription is filled with 5 mg pills, instead, this is 240 pills a month. A years’ worth is 1,440 pills or 2,880 pills for just one patient. If the physician has 50 similar patients, this is 72,000 pills or 144,000 pills a year that the physician is writing and a pharmacy or pharmacies are filling.

This does not seem extreme or unusual to me, at all, and these amounts are on the low side. Yet just as government agencies love to inflate the “street value” or contraband drugs they seize, they love to break down the number of opioids a physician writes so it seems to a layperson to be extraordinarily large. Furthermore, a pain management physician or any other kind of physician cannot survive with just 50 patients a month. It is far more likely for a physician to have a thousand (1,000) or more patients a month. I call this type of numerical exaggeration “bean counting.” But it has put a number of physicians and pharmacists in jail.

Judges should not allow such exaggerated numbers to be introduced into evidence in the absence of further information that places them in context. It is unfairly prejudicial to the defendant to do so.


Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with DEA Cases.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm are experienced in handling Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) cases, board of medicine cases and board of pharmacy cases regarding allegations of over-prescribing and illegal prescribing. If you are currently being investigated or facing other adverse actions by the DEA contact one of our attorneys by calling (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001. You can also visit our website for more information at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Booker, Brakkton. “Doctor Gets 40 Years For Illegally Prescribing More Than Half A Million Opioid Doses.” NPR. (October 2, 2019). Web.

“Virginia doctor could get life in prison today for prescribing 500,000 opioid pills.” RTV6. (October 2, 2019). Web.

Almasy, Steve. “Virginia doctor who illegally prescribed 500,000 opioid pills sentenced to 40 years in prison.” CNN. (October 2, 2019). Web.

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

KeyWords: legal representation for pain management physicians and pharmacists, legal representation for pharmacies, pharmacy defense attorney, pain management physician defense attorney, pharmacist defense lawyer, pain management physician defense lawyer, representation for False Claims Act (FCA) investigation, False Claims Act representation, FCA defense lawyer, board representation for pharmacists, board representation for pharmacies, board representation for physicians, Board of Pharmacy investigation representation, legal representation for board investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) defense attorney, board of medicine attorney, board of pharmacy attorney, Department of Health investigations, pain clinics, over prescribing painkillers, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigation attorney, The Health Law Firm, administrative hearing defense attorney, DEA order to show cause (OSC) defense lawyer, legal representation for administrative hearings, administrative complaint representation, Board of Medicine representation, Board of Medicine attorney, Board of Medicine defense attorney, representation for Board of Medicine investigations, representation for Board of Medicine complaints, DEA hearing defense attorney, DEA investigation attorney, DEA hearing representation, DEA investigation representation, representation for DEA investigations against physicians, representation for pill mill allegations, representation for allegations of overprescribing, representation for overbilling, DOJ defense lawyer, representation for DOJ investigations, representation for health care professionals, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, DEA order to show cause (OSC) defense attorney

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2019 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By |2019-11-06T20:48:18-05:00November 6th, 2019|Categories: Colorado Health Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments
Load More Posts
Go to Top