Health Facilities Law Blog

Home/Health Facilities Law Blog

Judge Dismisses Florida Dentist’s COVID-19 Business Interruption Insurance Claim

George Indest Headshot

By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On September 3, 2020, a Florida federal judge dismissed a suit for business interruption insurance payments by a Florida dentist. The dentist claimed he sustained damages caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and related civil authority shutdowns of dental services. The dismissal freed Allied Insurance Company of America from having to pay the dentist’s for COVID-19 related losses, holding that the policy’s “virus exclusion” barred coverage of the insurance claim made.


Insurance Coverage for COVID-19 Related Losses.

The dentist sued his insurance carrier for damages that he argued were “caused by or result[ing] from a Covered Cause of Loss.” The causes of the alleged loss, he maintained, included the COVID-19 virus’s impact on his dental practice and the Florida governor’s emergency declaration that limited dental services during a period of time. Specifically, he claimed that he incurred costs to decontaminate his dental office and lost valuable income because of the governor’s dental services limitation. The dentist alleged that Allied breached the insurance contract by denying coverage in April.

Allied’s insurance policy provides coverage “for direct physical loss or damage to covered property at the [plaintiff’s] premises” that is “caused by or result[s] from any Covered Cause of Loss.” Allied argued that there was no direct physical loss or damage to covered property at the clinic due to appointment cancellations or the closure of the dental practice.


Dismissal of the Law Suit.

U.S. District Court Judge John Badalamenti, for the Middle District of Florida, dismissed the case. He found that the dental practice’s loss or damage asserted was “not due to a covered cause of loss.” More importantly, he found that the policy contained an exclusion for loss or damage caused “directly or indirectly,” by “[a]ny virus, bacterium or other microorganisms that induces or is capable of inducing physical distress, illness or disease.”

According to the judge’s order, in order for the insurer to provide coverage, losses from business suspension must be caused by direct physical loss or damage. He ruled that the dentist failed to demonstrate what the policy required in order to be a covered loss. To read the order in full, click here.

With such a specific exclusion as this policy contained, it was difficult for the judge in the case to rule any other way.


Litigation on Whether Insurance Policies Should Cover Losses Due to Coronavirus Closures.

This recent Florida dismissal is another in a string of cases where insurers have prevailed in Coronavirus business loss cases, because of similar exclusions in their policies. In a similar case, a Michigan federal judge sided with the insurance company saying it didn’t have to cover a chiropractic office’s COVID-19 claimed losses. Like the case above, the judge said the business failed to allege physical loss and, therefore, the policy’s virus exclusion barred coverage. Click here to read the judge’s order in this case.

According to insurance experts and regulators, most businesses and professionals will probably find it difficult to obtain an insurance payout because of policy changes made after the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak. SARS, which infected 8,000 people, led to millions of dollars in business-interruption insurance claims. As a result, many insurers added exclusions to standard commercial policies for virus losses. The added policy language potentially allows insurance companies to avoid hundreds of billions of dollars in business-interruption claims because of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Since a wide-scale virus outbreak is such a rare event, most policy purchasers overlooked this exception. There certainly wasn’t any concerted effort to make insureds aware of the exclusion nor to offer them the opportunity to purchase specific virus outbreak insurance coverage.

A global pandemic presents unique problems for insurance companies. After the SARS outbreak at the beginning of this millennium, many insurance companies realized they would not be able to cover such a broad-scale event causing massive losses. Such an event could have damages greater than those sustained in the largest hurricane to strike the U.S. The insurance industry argued to state regulators that such policy exclusions were necessary, considering the overwhelming number of claims that might arise from a single disease outbreak.

This foresight on the part of the insurance companies saved their shareholders billions, if not trillions, of dollars. Unfortunately business and professionals have had to shoulder the losses.

So, it begs the question: Did insurers actually know the potential damage a viral pandemic could wreak on businesses and, therefore, purposefully exclude coverage? Disputes over the precise wording of business insurance policies will most likely continue to generate court battles like those discussed above.

Read my prior blog on this subject to learn more.


Recommendation for the Future.

There are several options that businesses and state insurance regulators should consider to try to prevent such massive losses from going uncompensated in the future.

First would be to create and provide virus damage insurance similar to that provided for flood insurance by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The biggest problem would be that losses could easily exceed the largest hurricane that one could imagine. However, the NFIP has shown this type of plan works.

Second would be similar programs provided at the state level. At the present time, many states, have captive insurance companies to fund losses from wind damage caused by storms. In Florida, the Citizens Property Insurance Corporation (CPIC) provides such coverage.

The biggest problem I see with both of the above is that short-sighted and selfish people don’t want to purchase such insurance and, thereby, make it less expensive for all involved. They figure that the government will bail them out anyway in such an event, so why should they pay. Therefore, either making it paid for completely with taxpayer money or a requirement of obtaining a business license or professional license or some combination, may be a way to finance it.

Creating a trust fund with assessments to employers and employees, similar to what is currently done for social security, would be another option. Creating a large trust fund that could cover such tragic events might work best. However, this would have to be made “raider safe” so that Congress does not come back and raid these funds and use them for other purposes like it has done to the United States Postal Service (USPS).

At the very least, some type of universal virus pandemic business loss insurance should be mandated by law or, at least, partially funded by the government. Making it mandatory means making it cheaper and making it work.


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, home health agencies, hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, pain management clinics, nursing homes, and any other healthcare provider. We represent health 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, patient complaints, and in Department of Health investigations.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or toll-free (888) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.ThehealthLawFirm.com

Sources:

Zhang, Daphne. “Fla. Dentist’s Bid For COVID-19 Loss Coverage Axed.” Law360. (September 3, 2020). Web.

Zhang, Daphne. “State Farm Needn’t Cover Chiropractor’s COVID-19 Losses.” Law360. (September 3, 2020). Web.

Frankel, Todd. “Insurers knew the damage a viral pandemic could wreak on businesses. So they excluded coverage.” The Washington Post. (April 2, 2020). Web.

About the Author: 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, which has a national practice. 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 Toll-Free: (888) 331-6620.

KeyWords: healthcare employment law representation, legal representation for physicians, doctor defense legal representation, legal representation for healthcare professionals, complex health care litigation attorney, complex civil litigation attorney, complex healthcare litigation lawyer, complex medical litigation lawyer, representation for complex medical litigation, representation for healthcare business litigation matters, business insurance representation, business interruption insurance claims defense, COVID-19 business insurance claim representation, The Health Law Firm, reviews of The Health Law Firm Attorneys, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, legal representation for physicians and health care professionals, attorney for physician suits against insurers, complex medical business litigation against health insurers

“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.

 

Florida Senate Passes New Legislature to Fix Patient Brokering Act

Attorney Amanda I. ForbesBy Amanda I. Forbes, J.D.

A new act (SB 1120) was recently passed by the Florida Senate and enacted on June 18, 2020, with an effective date of July 1, 2020. SB1120 restored the Florida Patient Brokering Act to its original wording to correct a big glitch made when the Legislature previously amended it. On June 27, 2019, there was an amendment enacted by the Florida Legislature that changed the Florida Patient Brokering Act, Section 817.505, Florida Statutes. It became effective on July 1, 2019. The amendment changed Section 817.505(3)(a), Florida Statutes.

The original wording of the statute stated:

(3) This section shall not apply to the following payment practices:
(a) Any discount, payment, waiver of payment,
or payment practice not prohibited
by 42 U.S.C. s. 1320a-7b(b) or
regulations promulgated thereunder.”

Section 817.503(3)(a). (Emphasis added).

The new amendment to the Florida Patient Brokering Act stated:

(3) This section shall not apply to the following payment practices:
(a) Any discount, payment, waiver of
payment, or payment practice expressly
authorized by” 42 U.S.C. s. 1320a-7b(b)(3) or
regulations adopted thereunder.”

Section 817.505(3)(a). (Emphasis added)

This Federal law exemption had previously been relied on to avoid the Florida statute’s criminal prohibitions, particularly, by health law attorneys advising their clients on proposed business ventures. The most immediate problem with the amendment was that there are no “discounts, payments waivers of payment or payment practices” that are “specifically approved” by the federal statute.

Rather than provide clarification, the amendment only created confusion. The Federal Anti-Kickback Statute (42 U.S.C. Section 1320a-7b(b)) does not “expressly authorize” any exception or safe harbor. The amended language caused confusion regarding whether an arrangement must qualify for safe harbor protection under the Federal anti-kickback statute in order to be legal under Florida law. Therefore, the amendment went from a state law that was similar to and cohesive with the federal statute to one which was much stricter than the federal law and prohibited many current business arrangements.

When there is no safe harbor, the arrangement is evaluated by its intent. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal recently confirmed that the Patient Brokering Act is a “general intent” statute. This means that an individual only needs to intend to commit the act prohibited by the statute (e.g. paying for referrals), as opposed to intending to specifically violate the Patient Brokering Act. See State v. Kigar, 279 So. 3d 217 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)

The bill (SB1120) was passed by the Florida Senate and enacted on June 19, 2020, with an effective date of July 1, 2020. SB1120 restored the Florida Patient Brokering Act to its original wording.

View the bill in full 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, home health agencies, 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 school professors and clinical staff. We represent health 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, patient complaints, and in Department of Health investigations.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call our office at (407) 331-6620 or toll-free at (888) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.ThehealthLawFirm.com

About the Author: Amanda I. Forbes, practices 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 or toll-free: (888) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Representation for healthcare professionals, representation for healthcare compliance, representation for healthcare facilities, healthcare facility defense lawyer, healthcare compliance defense attorney, healthcare license defense attorney, Complex Healthcare Litigation, complex healthcare litigation defense lawyer, Complex Business Litigation, Complex Commercial Litigation, Class Action Litigation, medical regulatory 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 © 2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Dentists, What Should You Do If You Or Your Staff Tests Positive For COVID-19 at Your Practice?

Attorney Achal A. AggarwalBy Achal A. Aggarwal, M.B.A., J.D., and George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

You or a member of your staff has a confirmed case of COVID-19. What now? Your primary concern is for the individual affected. However, as a health professional operating a professional practice, you also have a duty to your employees and to your other patients. You have to be concerned about any patients with whom your infected staff might have had contact. These steps and protocols, all from prominent government agencies, are meant to help guide you if you or someone in your practice tests positive for COVID-19.

Follow these steps below to help ensure the health and safety of others and to reduce the likelihood of additional transmissions:

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that employees who were exposed to the infected staff member should be quarantined for 14 days, keep track of their symptoms, and contact their own healthcare provider if the symptoms progress.

• Your entire dental office and facility, especially the waiting areas, restrooms, and treatment areas, should receive a “deep cleaning.” These should be regularly cleaned and sanitized or sterilized as the case may be. Click here for additional information on the proper ways to do so.

• According to the CDC, the Dental Healthcare Provider (DHP) should ensure that environmental cleaning and disinfection procedures are followed consistently and correctly after each patient. However, according to the CDC, the DHP does not need to attempt to sterilize a dental operatory between each patient.

• Sterilization protocols do not vary for respiratory pathogens. According to the CDC, the dental professional should perform routine cleaning, disinfection, and sterilization protocols, and follow the recommendations for “Sterilization and Disinfection of Patient-Care Items” present in the Guidelines for Infection Control in Dental Healthcare Settings.

• The Dentists should have and implement sick leave policies for any infected staff. These should be flexible, non-punitive, and consistent with public health guidance.

• As part of routine practice, dentists should also monitor themselves for fever and symptoms consistent with COVID-19 regularly.

• The dentists should screen all staff at the beginning of their shift for fever and symptoms consistent with COVID-19. One person, such as the receptionist, might be assigned to this task. Equipment that does not require actual physical contact, such as an infrared thermometer, should be used. The dentists in the practice should be required to undergo this screening, as well.

For additional information, guidance, and resource documents on this topic, please visit our Health Law Articles and Documents page.  Be sure to visit our blog page regularly to stay updated on the latest news, policies, and health law topics!

We continue to receive inquiries from healthcare practitioners requesting information regarding health law matters during this time of uncertainty. We are here for you! If you have additional questions in the COVID-19 crisis or any health law matter, please call our office at (407) 331-6620.

Additional Resources.

The following are additional resources dentists should consult on this issue:


Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Dentists.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to dentists in the Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Department of Regulatory Affairs (DORA) investigations, Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigations, FBI investigations, Office of Civil Rights (OCR) HIPAA complaints and investigations, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) subpoenas and investigations, state board of dentistry complaints and investigations and other types of investigations of health professionals and providers.

Our firm also routinely represents physicians, dentists, orthodontists, medical groups, clinics, pharmacies, home health care agencies, nursing homes and other health care providers in Department of Health (DOH), Department of Regulatory Affairs (DORA), and Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) inspections, audits, and recovery actions, as well as Medicare and Medicaid investigations, audits and recovery actions.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (888) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

 

KeyWords: Health law defense lawyer, legal representation of health care professionals, Medicare fraud defense attorney, Medicare audit defense attorney, Medicaid fraud defense attorney, Medicaid audit defense attorney,  disruptive physician defense attorney, legal representation for disruptive physician, legal representation for Medicare fraud, legal representation for Medicaid fraud, legal representation for clinical research investigations, legal representation for clinical research fraud, Florida health law attorney, legal representation for administrative hearings, DEA hearing defense attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, Department of Health defense attorney,  healthcare employment law representation, legal representation for physicians, doctor defense legal representation, legal representation for healthcare professionals, complex health care litigation attorney, complex civil litigation attorney, complex healthcare litigation lawyer, complex medical litigation lawyer, representation for complex medical litigation, representation for healthcare business litigation matters, administrative procedure act defense, representation for administrative hearing, Board of Dentistry defense lawyer, representation for Board of Dentistry investigation, representation for Board of Dentistry hearing, Board hearing defense attorney, Board of Medicine defense lawyer, dental hygienist defense lawyer, dentist defense lawyer, representation for dentists Department of Health (DOH) representation, DOH defense attorney, representation for DOH hearings, representation for DOH investigations, representation for disciplinary charges, representation for disciplinary complaint

Headshot of The Health Law Firm's attorney George F. Indest IIIAbout the Authors: 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, and Achal A. Aggarwal, M.B.A., J.D. 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 |2020-08-06T12:46:15-04:00September 1st, 2020|Categories: Health Facilities Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

UF Rescinds Prospect For Racist Online Post

George Indest HeadshotBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On June 8, 2020, the University of Florida (UF) reportedly announced via Twitter that it had rescinded its offer of acceptance to a prospective student. The offer was rescinded by the university because of an allegedly racist message posted by the student on social media. According to reports, UF spokesman Steve Orlando stated that the university received multiple e-mails complaining about the post. As a result of the investigation, the student is no longer a UF prospect, according to the announcement.

Social networks provide students, resident physicians, fellows, and clinical professors with opportunities for greater communication, information/experience sharing, collaborative learning, professional interactions, and outreach. However, they can also be dangerous if someone has unprofessional comments or content. Many applicants may not be aware that their social media presence may have an impact on their chances of acceptance, especially for medical students.

Although it is true that we all have a First Amendment right to freedom of speech, by getting up and making a speech that violates a school, institution, or program’s policies, you are asking for trouble. we have had cases of students and of residents getting into trouble for not only allegedly racist FaceBook and Twitter posts and re-posts, but also for “unprofessional” posts and re-posts. These include the use of profanity, racist comments, and “unprofessional” photographs. Those who are students or resident physicians typically are in an environment where there is heightened awareness of and heightened scrutiny regarding such matters. Although they must be provided with “due process of law” before they are terminated, this could be very expensive and result in unnecessary blemishes on a person’s record. If the individual making the comments, posts, or re-posts, hasn’t started yet, then they have far fewer rights and do not have any “interest” that is protectable under due process of law principles. So why take the risk?

How Social Media Can Impact Medical Students and Admissions.

On social media sites, healthcare professionals, including medical students, should always represent themselves in a manner that reflects values of professionalism, integrity, acceptance of diversity, and commitment to ethical behavior. Physicians must be aware that content posted may negatively affect their reputations among patients and colleagues. Basically, your actions online may also affect your medical career, especially for medical students.

In one recent situation, a medical student says the University of New Mexico gave him two options: change his Facebook post or get out. Click here to read more about it.

With the increase in popularity and usage of social media platforms, the American Medical Student Association (AMSA) published Guidelines for Medical Students and Physicians. Click here to read the guidelines in full.

To read about how our firm can assist medical students, residents, and graduates in a variety of legal matters, click here.

Contact a Health Care Attorney Experienced in the Representation of Medical Students, Interns, Residents and Applicants, Fellows, and Those Involved in Graduate Medical Education.

The Health Law Firm and its attorneys represent interns, residents, fellows, and medical school students in disputes with their medical schools, supervisors, residency programs, and in dismissal hearings. We have experience representing such individuals and those in graduate medical education programs in various disputes regarding their academic and clinical performance, allegations of substance abuse, failure to complete integral parts training, alleged false or incomplete statements on applications, allegations of impairment (because of abuse or addiction to drugs or alcohol or because of mental or physical issues), because of discrimination due to race, sex, national origin, sexual orientation and any other matters.

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

Sources:

Keating, Jennifer. “Social Media Guidelines for Medical Students and Physicians.” American Medical Student Association (AMSA). (September 15, 2016). Web.

Nelson, Sarah. “Florida student who wrote racist social media post won’t join UF.” Palm Beach Post. (June 10, 2020). Web.

“How Medical School Applicants Should Manage Social Media.” U.S. News. (June 11, 2018). Web.

About the Author: 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, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave. Suite 1000, Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620

KeyWords: Graduate medical education (GME) defense attorney, international medical graduate attorney, graduate medical education defense lawyer, lawyer for medical students, medical resident physician attorney, residency program legal dispute, residency program litigation, medical school litigation, legal representation for medical residents, legal dispute with medical school, medical students legal counsel, disruptive physician attorney, impaired medical student legal counsel, impaired resident legal defense attorney, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) defense lawyer, USMLE defense attorney, National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) defense counsel, Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG) defense lawyer, ECFMG defense attorney, legal representation for USMLE investigations, legal representation for NBME investigations, legal representation for irregular behavior, irregular behavior defense attorney, irregular behavior defense counsel, The Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys, Philadelphia attorney for ECFMG hearing, Philadelphia lawyer for NBME hearing, Philadelphia legal counsel for USMLE hearing

“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.

Florida Oncology Group Agrees to Pay $100 Million in Antitrust Probe

George Indest

Attorney Geroge F. Indest III

By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

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: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law is an attorney with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Avenue, Suite 1000, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

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.

Colorado Judge Says Board of Pharmacy Must Hand Over Patient Identifying Data to DEA

George Indest HeadshotBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law
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 Investigations and Audits.

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.

Clashing Over Patient Privacy and 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 Court’s 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.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Nurses and Other Healthcare Professionals.

The Health Law Firm’s attorneys routinely provide legal representation to nurses, pharmacists, pharmacies, physicians, and other health providers. We provide legal representation for nurses in Board of Nursing investigations and complaints, DORA investigations and complaints, and Department of Health (DOH) investigations and complaints. We defend in state and federal administrative hearings, investigations, and litigation. We also represent health professionals in formal and informal administrative hearings. We have a great deal of experience in defending against DEA actions. We provide legal representation across the U.S., not just in Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 or (970) 416-7456 and visit our website at 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 Author: 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, which has a national practice. 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 |2020-06-03T16:48:48-04:00July 22nd, 2020|Categories: Health Facilities Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

Have You Found an Experienced NSO Insurance Attorney to Defend Your Nursing License or Nurse Practitioners License?

Attorney George F. Indest head shotBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law
Many nurses, nurse practitioners, and certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) carry professional malpractice insurance through the Nurses Service Organization (NSO) or one of the other similar insurance companies. This insurance is inexpensive and provides excellent coverage. What you may not realize, however, is that such insurance provides many added benefits, other than just coverage on nursing liability lawsuits. It will pay for legal defense expenses if there is a complaint filed against your nursing license. It will pay legal expenses for a lawyer to get involved and represent you if you receive a subpoena to testify or provide records. It will cover you if you have a HIPAA complaint or breach of medical privacy complaint filed against you.

Under such policies, the insurance company will pay the legal fees and other costs related to your defense. However, most of the time, you will still 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. Your primary concern should be to find and retain an attorney who accepts the insurance that you have, whether it is NSO Insurance, CPH & Associates Insurance, Philadelphia Insurance, Trust Management Services, Firemans Fund, 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 certainly try to find an attorney who will.

2. Another 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 and on similar matters. 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.

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

4. 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 by signing this type of agreement, you will be pleading guilty to whatever offenses are charged. In most cases, you will probably be innocent of the charges and should request a formal administrative hearing in order to prove this.

5. 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 and informal administrative hearings. The lack of familiarity with such investigations and boards can be costly to you.

6. You don’t necessarily need an attorney who is located in your city, county, or state. Almost all the work on the case will be done by telephone and e-mail. You usually have only one meeting or hearing with the investigator or its board 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 attorney. 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 nurses with nursing 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 Nurses Service Organization (NSO) at (800) 247-1500; you can reach CPH & Associates at (800) 875-1911 or (312) 987-9823; you can access a list of professional license defense attorneys who represent nurses online at https://taana.org/referral/.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Nurses.

The Health Law Firm’s attorneys routinely represent nurses in Board of Nursing investigations and complaints, DORA investigations and complaints, and Department of Health (DOH) investigations and complaints. We appear before the Board of Nursing in licensing matters and in many other legal matters. We represent nurses across the U.S., not just in Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 or (970) 416-7456 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

About the Author: 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, which has a national practice. 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.

Keywords: Nurses Service Organization (NSO) insurance defense attorney, NSO lawyer, Florida NSO defense attorney lawyer, Colorado NSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for NSO matters in Colorado, legal representation for NSO matters in Florida, representation for professional liability insurance cases, Louisiana NSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for NSO matters in Louisiana, NSO deposition defense coverage, Virginia NSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for NSO matters in Virginia, legal representation for NSO matters in Virginia, representation for professional liability insurance cases, Virginia NSO deposition defense coverage, nurse legal representation, Board of Nursing informal hearing attorney, Board of Nursing formal hearing attorney, Department of Health (DOH) investigation of nurses, representation for deposition of nurses, nurse administrative complaint defense, appeal of board of nursing final order, nurse license application, nurse emergency suspension order appeals representation, legal representation of Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioners (ARNPs), Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) attorney representation, Certified Nurse Midwife (CNM) legal representation, nurse attorney Florida Colorado Louisiana Virginia, 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, Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys, administrative complaint defense attorney, administrative hearing defense 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 |2020-05-07T11:34:37-04:00June 1st, 2020|Categories: Health Facilities Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

National Nurse Attorneys Association Releases COVID-19 Paper in Support of Front Line Nurses and Health Workers

George Indest HeadshotBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law
On April 2, 2020, The American Association of Nurse Attorneys (TAANA) released a position paper providing an analysis of several key legal issues now facing nurses, physicians and other healthcare professionals dealing with the novel coronavirus pandemic throughout the U.S. The paper addresses many key challenges faced by healthcare professionals on the front line of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the lack of personal protective equipment (PPE), inadequate COVID-19 testing, and professional license/employment issues.

Main Issues and Recommendations.

Given the alarming number of COVID-19 cases in the U.S., TAANA encourages federal, state and local governments and administrative professional licensing agencies to adopt universal protocols to address several key issues.

Specifically, TAANA recommended:

• the federal government to fully utilize the Defense Production Act to ensure the manufacture and supply of adequate PPE and other medical supplies;

• the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) maintain strict COVID-19 PPE regulations and guidelines that are science-based and data-driven, not supply-driven;

• state professional licensing boards to release position statements which offer guidance and support to healthcare professionals regarding practice and ethical issues during this unprecedented time;

• federal, state, and local government to grant front line healthcare professionals with immediate access to COVID-19 testing;

• lack of COVID-19 testing and rapid results for healthcare professionals and their families is unacceptable; and

• the lack of clear policy may result in the illegal termination or discipline of a healthcare professional or unresolved ethical dilemmas based on inconsistent rules, regulations, standards of practice and circumstances.

TAANA further encourages nurses and other healthcare professionals to partner with their professional associations in educating the workforce regarding their legal and ethical rights and responsibilities in the healthcare workplace.

A copy of the full TAANA Position Paper can be read on our website.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Nurses.

The Health Law Firm’s attorneys routinely represent nurses in Board of Nursing investigations and complaints, DORA investigations and complaints, and Department of Health (DOH) investigations and complaints. We appear before the Board of Nursing in licensing matters and in many other legal matters. We represent nurses across the U.S., not just in Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 or (970) 416-7456 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Diaz Baez, Charlotte. “National Nurse Attorney Association Releases COVID-19 Position Paper.” Georgia Nurses Association (GNA). (April 2, 2020). Web.
“The American Association of Nurse Attorneys: TAANA’s Position Paper on Covid-19; Advocating for NURSES and other Healthcare Professionals licensed throughout the United States of America.” Washington Center for Nursing. (April 2, 2020). Web.

Williams, Hannah. “TAANA’s Position Paper on Covid-19; Advocating for NURSES and other Healthcare Professionals licensed throughout the United States of America.” TAANA. (April 2, 2020). Web.

About the Author: 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, which has a national practice. 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.

Keywords: nurse legal representation, Board of Nursing informal hearing attorney, Board of Nursing formal hearing attorney, Department of Health (DOH) investigation of nurses, representation for deposition of nurses, nurse administrative complaint defense, appeal of board of nursing final order, nurse license application legal representation, nurse emergency suspension order appeals representation, nurse certification defense lawyer, legal representation of Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioners (ARNPs), Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) attorney representation, Certified Nurse Midwife (CNM) legal representation, nurse attorney Florida Colorado Louisiana Virginia, representation for Louisiana and Florida Department of Health (DOH) complaint investigations, nurses insurance defense attorney, NSO lawyer, Florida NSO defense attorney lawyer, Colorado NSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for NSO matters in Colorado, legal representation for NSO matters in Florida, representation for professional liability insurance cases, Louisiana NSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for NSO matters in Louisiana, NSO deposition defense coverage, Virginia NSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for NSO matters in Virginia, legal representation for NSO matters in Virginia, legal representation for nursing credentials committee, Virginia NSO deposition defense coverage 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, Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys, administrative complaint defense attorney, administrative hearing defense 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 |2020-05-07T11:22:40-04:00May 21st, 2020|Categories: Health Facilities Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

Prosecutors Push to Keep Florida TeleMedicine Suspect in Jail for $424 Million Fraud Scheme

Attorney George F. Indest IIIBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law
On March 19, 2020, federal prosecutors in New Jersey federal court pushed to keep a suspect involved in a $424 million telemedicine scheme in jail.  Authorities called him an “unrepentant conman” who carried out one of the largest health care fraud schemes in U.S. history and is likely to flee the country if released.

Telehealth Fraud & Illegal Kickbacks.

The defendant, who owns telehealth companies, has been locked up for nearly 11 months since he was charged last year with running an international fraud and kickback scam. He allegedly paid doctors to order unnecessary orthotic braces for Medicare beneficiaries and solicited bribes and kickbacks from brace suppliers in exchange for patient referrals.

Prosecutors say he went to great lengths to hide his scheme, including lying to obtain legal opinion letters bolstering his claim that he ran legitimate companies that profited from patient subscription fees. In reality, he was concealing the fact that most of those payments were kickbacks from brace suppliers.

A Possible Flight Risk?

In an opposition brief, prosecutors said that there aren’t any suitable bail conditions for the suspect, given his risk of flight and the danger he poses to the community. According to the government, he has a long history of deception and scheming involving foreign businesses, residences, and assets, including a $1 million yacht. Additionally, he claimed to control several foreign bank accounts and once told a cooperating witness that if the government started investigating him, he would flee to Venezuela.

The defendant argued that he’s not a flight risk because he has no criminal history and has close ties to his South Florida community.

Florida’s Involved in a Major Fraud Case, Shocker!

Another scenario that seems to be right out of a Carl Hiaasen or Tim Dorsey novel.  Why does Florida continue to attract and protect the assets fo fraudsters, conmen, and deadbeats?  Does it go back to our history of being the wintering ground for carnies and traveling circuses?

In 2019, the defendant was charged along with 23 other individuals in a crackdown on telehealth fraud schemes in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, South Carolina Texas, Florida, and California, involving over $1.2 billion in losses.

Given his close community ties and its reputation, it comes as no surprise that getting doctors to sign off on fraudulent prescriptions was a part allegedly played by telehealth company owners in Florida. Click here to view the indictment.

For years, Florida has been the home to health care fraudsters and ranked number one in terms of fraud cases. So, it’s not shocking that three Florida telehealth executives were also charged in what appears to be the biggest case in the takedown.
Click here to learn more about this case.

Therefore, to prevent flight and protect the public, prosecutors requested that the Court deny the
defendant’s motion to revoke the detention order and keep him detained. Click here to read the opposition brief.

To read about a similar telehealth case in Florida, click here to read my prior blog.

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 health care provider. We represent facilities, individuals, groups, and institutions in contracts, sales, mergers, and acquisitions.

The services we provide include reviewing and negotiating contracts, business transactions, professional license defense, representation in investigations, credential defense, representation in peer review and clinical privileges hearings, Medicare and Medicaid audits, commercial litigation, and administrative hearings. To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 or (970) 416-7456 or visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Bishop, Stweart. “Feds Push To Keep Telehealth Fraud Suspect Locked Up.” Law360. (March 19, 2020). Web.

Godoy, Jody. “Execs, MDs Charged In $1.2B Medicare Fraud Scheme.” Law360. (April 9, 2019). Web.

About the Author: 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, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave. Suite 1000, Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Registered agent for telehealth provider, telehealth provider investigation defense lawyer attorney, telemedicine representation, Florida telemedicine defense lawyer, telehealth expansion, representation for telehealth investigations, representation for telemedicine investigations, Florida Department of Health (DOH) representation, DOH defense lawyer, representation for DOH investigations, representation for Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) investigations, AHCA defense lawyer, AHCA investigation attorney, health care defense attorney, health care compliance defense lawyer, Florida health care attorney, representation for health care professionals, defense lawyer for health care providers, doctor lawyer, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, Medicare audit defense attorney, Medicare inspection defense lawyer, Medicare subpoena defense lawyer, Medicare search warrant defense attorney, legal representation on Medicare fraud investigation, legal representation for Medicare fraud inspection, Medicare overpayment demand defense attorney, Department of Justice Health and Human Services subpoena defense attorney, legal representation for Department of Justice (DOJ) Health and Human Services subpoena, RAC audit defense attorney, ZPIC audit defense lawyer, Medicare fraud defense attorney, health care subpoena defense 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 © 2020 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved

The American Association of Nurse Attorneys (TAANA) Releases COVID-19 Paper in Support of Front Line Health Workers

George Indest HeadshotBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law
On April 2, 2020, The American Association of Nurse Attorneys (TAANA) released a position paper providing an analysis of several key legal issues now facing nurses, physicians and other healthcare professionals dealing with the novel coronavirus pandemic throughout the U.S. The paper addresses many key challenges faced by healthcare professionals on the front line of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the lack of personal protective equipment (PPE), inadequate COVID-19 testing, and professional license/employment issues.

Main Issues and Recommendations.

Given the alarming number of COVID-19 cases in the U.S., TAANA encourages federal, state, and local governments and administrative professional licensing agencies to adopt universal protocols to address several key issues.

Specifically, TAANA recommended:

• the federal government to fully utilize the Defense Production Act to ensure the manufacture and supply of adequate PPE and other medical supplies;

• the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) maintain strict COVID-19 PPE regulations and guidelines that are science-based and data-driven, not supply-driven;

• state professional licensing boards to release position statements which offer guidance and support to healthcare professionals regarding practice and ethical issues during this unprecedented time;

• federal, state, and local government to grant front line healthcare professionals with immediate access to COVID-19 testing;

• lack of COVID-19 testing and rapid results for healthcare professionals and their families is unacceptable; and

• the lack of clear policy may result in the illegal termination or discipline of a healthcare professional or unresolved ethical dilemmas based on inconsistent rules, regulations, standards of practice, and circumstances.

TAANA further encourages nurses and other healthcare professionals to partner with their professional associations in educating the workforce regarding their legal and ethical rights and responsibilities in the healthcare workplace.

A copy of the full TAANA Position Paper can be read on our website.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Nurses.

The Health Law Firm’s attorneys routinely represent nurses in Board of Nursing investigations and complaints, DORA investigations and complaints, and Department of Health (DOH) investigations and complaints. We appear before the Board of Nursing in licensing matters and in many other legal matters. We represent nurses across the U.S., not just in Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 or (970) 416-7456 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Diaz Baez, Charlotte. “National Nurse Attorney Association Releases COVID-19 Position Paper.” Georgia Nurses Association (GNA). (April 2, 2020). Web.
“The American Association of Nurse Attorneys: TAANA’s Position Paper on Covid-19; Advocating for NURSES and other Healthcare Professionals licensed throughout the United States of America.” Washington Center for Nursing. (April 2, 2020). Web.

Williams, Hannah. “TAANA’s Position Paper on Covid-19; Advocating for NURSES and other Healthcare Professionals licensed throughout the United States of America.” TAANA. (April 2, 2020). Web.

About the Author: 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, which has a national practice. 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.

Keywords: nurse legal representation, Board of Nursing informal hearing attorney, Board of Nursing formal hearing attorney, Department of Health (DOH) investigation of nurses, representation for deposition of nurses, nurse administrative complaint defense, appeal of board of nursing final order, nurse license application legal representation, nurse emergency suspension order appeals representation, nurse certification defense lawyer, legal representation of Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioners (ARNPs), Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) attorney representation, Certified Nurse Midwife (CNM) legal representation, nurse attorney Florida Colorado Louisiana Virginia, representation for Louisiana and Florida Department of Health (DOH) complaint investigations, nurses insurance defense attorney, NSO lawyer, Florida NSO defense attorney lawyer, Colorado NSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for NSO matters in Colorado, legal representation for NSO matters in Florida, representation for professional liability insurance cases, Louisiana NSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for NSO matters in Louisiana, NSO deposition defense coverage, Virginia NSO defense attorney lawyer, legal representation for NSO matters in Virginia, legal representation for NSO matters in Virginia, legal representation for nursing credentials committee, Virginia NSO deposition defense coverage 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, Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys, administrative complaint defense attorney, administrative hearing defense 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 |2020-05-19T18:45:43-04:00May 19th, 2020|Categories: Health Facilities Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments
Load More Posts
Go to Top