Pharmacist | The Health Law Firm Blog

Florida Pharmacy Owner to Serve 15 Years in Prison for $100 Million Billing Fraud Scheme

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

On April 26, 2018, the owner of several Florida pharmacies was sentenced to 15 years in prison and ordered to give up $54.5 million in restitution. Nicholas A. Borgesano Jr., owner of A to Z Pharmacies, pled guilty to his role in a $100 million scheme involving bogus insurance reimbursements for prescription drugs.

He pled guilty in November to charges of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and conspiracy to engage in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity, according to the order. Click here to read more.

Health Care Billing Fraud Schemes.

According to prosecutors, Borgesano was at the center of an alleged scheme in which the pharmacy owner used his six stores to peddle prescription compound medications. He would then submit fraudulent reimbursement claims to Medicare, Tricare and private insurance companies.

Borgesano and his co-conspirators are accused of manipulating billing codes in the reimbursement claims and submit claims for pharmaceutical ingredients they didn’t even have. Additionally, he used one of his pharmacies in Florida as the hub of operations and paid his co-conspirators through shell companies, checks and the purchase of assets, prosecutors said.

From the pharmacy owner and his group of conspirators, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has seized $7.6 million worth of property, including several luxury vehicles and a 50-foot racing boat, the DOJ said. To read more about the co-conspirators, click here to read the press release issued by the DOJ.

To read the judgement in full click here.

The expensive prescription medications and creams involved in this case have been targeted by prosecutors in a handful of other Florida suits alleging Medicare and Tricare fraud by pharmacy owners and others. Click here to read one of my prior blogs involving a similar case.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Pharmacies and Pharmacists.

The Health Law Firm represents pharmacists and pharmacies in DEA, DOH and FDA investigations, qui tam and whistleblower cases, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, administrative hearings, inspections and audits. The firm’s 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:

Greene, Kat. “Pharmacy Owner Gets 15 Years For Role In $100M Scheme.” Law360. (April 27, 2018). Web.

Manning, Margie. “New Port Richey pharmacy owner sentenced in $100 million fraud scheme.” Tampa Bay Business Journal. (April 26, 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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: False Claims Act defense attorney, FCA legal counsel, FCA defense lawyer, Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) defense attorney, FCA representation, legal representation for allegations of violating Anti-Kickback Statute, AKS representation, TRICARE false claims legal defense attorney, TRICARE physician representation, legal representation violating False Claims Act, pharmaceutical fraud lawyer, compounding pharmacy attorney, fraudulent practices of pharmaceutical companies, FCA violations attorney, health care fraud representation, TRICARE fraud attorney, health law defense attorney, health care fraud defense attorney, The Health Law Firm, representation for health care fraud investigations, compounding pharmacy lawyer, prescription reimbursement representation, pharmacy defense attorney, pharmacist defense lawter, representation for pharmacies, representation for pharmacists, legal representation for health care facilities, representation for health care professionals, legal defense of TRICARE providers, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation representation, DOJ defense attorney, representation for DOJ matters, attorney 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 © 2018 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By The Health Law Firm|2018-06-26T00:27:33-04:00June 26, 2018|Categories: Legal Defense for Pharmacists, Pharmacist, Pharmacy Law, Pharmacy Law Blog, Uncategorized|Tags: AKS representation, Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) defense attorney, attorney reviews of The Health Law Firm, compounding pharmacy attorney, compounding pharmacy lawyer, DOJ defense attorney, False Claims Act defense attorney, FCA defense lawyer, FCA legal counsel, FCA representation, FCA violations attorney, fraudulent practices of pharmaceutical companies, health care fraud defense attorney, health care fraud representation, health law defense attorney, legal defense of TRICARE providers, legal representation for allegations of violating Anti-Kickback Statute, legal representation for health care facilities, legal representation violating False Claims Act, pharmaceutical fraud lawyer, pharmacist defense lawter, pharmacy defense attorney, prescription reimbursement representation, representation for DOJ matters, representation for health care fraud investigations, representation for health care professionals, representation for pharmacies, representation for pharmacists, the health law firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, TRICARE false claims legal defense attorney, Tricare fraud attorney, TRICARE physician representation, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation representation|3 Comments

The Government’s Use of Civil Forfeiture to Combat Health Care Fraud and Pill Mills in Florida

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

Recently we have seen government prosecutors and agencies, including the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU), the U.S. Attorney General’s (AG) Office, and local sheriff and police departments use the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act against health professionals and health facilities in health-related cases.

A prompt, aggressive defense to these actions may recover the property or funds seized and, more importantly, a good defense can be used to help resolve any pending criminal charges.

Civil Forfeiture of Property is Used to Fight Alleged Criminal Activity.

The civil forfeiture of property has become a popular tool for state and federal agencies to combat alleged criminal activity. In Florida, the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, Sections 932.701 through 932.706, Florida Statues permits the government to seize personal property if there is probable cause to believe that property is either an instrumentality or the proceeds of criminal activity. In federal cases, such as Medicare fraud cases, the Federal Forfeiture Act can be found at 18 U.S.C. §983.Typically, a forfeiture action begins when personal property is seized as a result of a violation or arrest. The owner of the personal property is then entitled to a notice within five (5) days of the seizure.

Remember If You Are The Subject of a Seizure, Ask For:

1. An inventory of the seized items.

2. A Receipt.

3. The business cards or names, addresses, titles and phone numbers of each official or agent involved.

What is The Adversarial Preliminary Hearing?

Your most important right after a seizure is the right to an adversarial preliminary hearing. This request must be made in writing within fifteen (15) calendar days of receipt of the notice. Sometimes the notice is given at the time the property is seized; it is important not to lose or misplace it.

When an adversarial preliminary hearing is held, the Court will review the verified affidavit and any other supporting documents and take testimony to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that the seized property was used, is being used, was attempted to be used, or was intended to be used in violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act.

While the burden of proof at this initial stage favors the government, the adversarial preliminary hearing is one of the fastest and most effective ways to fight for the return of the property and assert any defenses that exist in the case. Even if unsuccessful at this hearing, the property owner is still entitled to a later civil forfeiture trial in which the government must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the property was used in the commission of or obtained through the proceeds of criminal activity. Often it is unable to do this and far more defenses are available for use at the trial.

The key to success in civil forfeiture actions is to immediately consult with an experienced attorney after the property has been seized. Your best defense is to act as quickly as possible.

Use of Adversarial Preliminary Hearing to Obtain Information for Defense.

The Adversarial Preliminary Hearing is also a tool by which a defendant can obtain early, detailed discovery on his or her case. During the hearing the law enforcement authorities will be required to testify under oath and produce any documentary evidence. This can prove invaluable to the criminal defense attorney in later criminal proceedings.

Did the Government Exceed the Bounds of Propriety?

Although the government would contend otherwise, we believe the main purpose in the government’s use of civil forfeitures is to shut down the alleged criminal and make it so he or she cannot hire an attorney to defend the person(s) accused. This does, unfortunately, often work.

However, there are defenses and often the government exceeds the bounds of propriety in its overzealousness. We have successfully defended, for example, cases in which:

– A sheriff’s office seized a spouse’s personal car for which she had traded in her old car.

– A teenage daughter’s college account that had in it only money she had earned from her part-time job.

– Money from a business owner’s purse which had been given to her by her mother to pay for her hospital labor and delivery charges.

– Money from a roll-over IRA account which had been invested long before any criminal activity was alleged to have occurred.

– Money from a family member’s account which had come from social security payments made for that person.

Every Person Should File a Claim.

If a spouse or other family member has an interest in the property, especially if that person is named on the account or title, that person should file a separate claim for return of the property and demand a Preliminary Adversarial Hearing. Even if the initial hearing is not successful in achieving an early return of the property, such defenses should prevail at the trial of the case.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Civil Forfeiture Cases.

The Health Law Firm routinely represents physicians, nurses, pharmacists, dentists, mental health counselors and other health providers in investigations, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, civil forfeitures, inspections and audits involving the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), 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.

What Do You Think?

What do you think of the Civil Forfeiture Act being used against health care professionals and health facilities? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.
About the Authors: Christopher E. Brown, J.D., is an attorney with 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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.

By The Health Law Firm|2013-06-25T09:00:36-04:00May 15, 2018|Categories: Department of Health, Legal Defense for Pharmacists, Pharmacist, Pharmacy|Tags: accused of health care fraud, burden of proof in forfeiture cases, Civil forfeiture, Civil Forfeiture Act, civil forfeiture of money, civil forfeiture of property, criminal charges against a health care facility, criminal charges against a health care professional, criminal charges against a health care provider, defense attorney, defense lawyer, Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, forfeiture, forfeiture action, forfeiture case, forfeiture proceedings, health care facilities, health care fraud, health care professionals, health law, Medicaid Fraud Control Unity (MFCU), pill mills, police, preliminary adversarial hearing, preventing health care fraud, seized personal property probably cause to seizer personal property, seized property, sheriff, the health law firm, U.S. Attorney’s Office|0 Comments

Terrible Things That Can Happen after Discipline on Your Pharmacist License or Resignation of a Pharmacist License after Notice of Investigation

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

Do you have a pharmacist license in several different states? Do you have a license in more than one health profession? Have you been notified that an investigation has been opened against you? Are you thinking about resigning your pharmacist license or voluntarily relinquishing such a license? Then you must be aware of the following.

First, you should never voluntarily relinquish or resign your license after you know that an investigation has been opened or that disciplinary action has been taken against you. Such a resignation is considered to be a “disciplinary relinquishment” and is treated the same as if your license had been revoked on disciplinary grounds.

Second, this will be reported out to other states, agencies, to the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB), to any certifying bodies for certifications you have and to other reporting agencies (such as the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy). Other states and other professional boards will most likely initiate disciplinary action based upon the first one.

Protect Your Pharmacist License.

The following is a list of some of the adverse actions that you can expect to be taken against you after discipline on your license or after you resign your pharmacist license after receiving notice of investigation:

1. A mandatory report to the National Practitioner Data Base (NPDB) which remains there for 50 years. Note: The Healthcare Integrity and Protection Data Bank or HIPDB recently merged into the NPDB.

2. Must be reported to and included in the Department of Health (DOH) profile that is available to the public online (for those having one), and remains for at least ten years.

3. Any other states or jurisdictions in which the pharmacist has a license will also initiate investigation and possible disciplinary action against him or her in that jurisdiction. (Note: I have had two clients who had licenses in seven other states and all, even ones that were inactive or not renewed years ago, initiated action).

4. The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will take action to exclude the provider from the Medicare Program. If this occurs (and most of these offenses require mandatory exclusion) the provider will be placed on the List of Excluded Individuals and Entities (LEIE) maintained by the HHS OIG.

a. If this happens, you are prohibited by law from working in any position in any capacity for any individual or business, including hospitals, nursing homes, home health agencies, physicians, medical groups, insurance companies, etc., that contract with or bill Medicare or Medicaid. This means, for example, you are prohibited from working as a janitor in a nursing home that accepts Medicare or Medicaid, even as an independent contractor.

b. If this happens, you are also automatically “debarred” or prohibited from participating in any capacity in any federal contracting, and you are placed on the U.S. General Services Administration’s (GSA) debarment list. This means you are prohibited by law from working in any capacity for any government contractor or anyone who takes government funding. This applies, for example, to prevent you from being a real estate agent involved in selling property financed by a government backed loan, prohibited from working for an electrical company that bids on contracts for government housing projects, working as a school teacher in a public school, etc.

c. If this happens, your state Medicaid Program is required to terminate you “for cause” from the state Medicaid Program. In many states, this is also grounds for revocation of your pharmacist license.

5. Any profile or reporting system maintained by a national organization or federation will include the adverse action in it, generally available to the public.

6. If you are a pharmacist or other professional with clinical privileges at a hospital, nursing home, HMO or clinic, action will be taken to revoke or suspend the clinical privileges and staff membership if you have such. This may be in a hospital, ambulatory surgical center, skilled nursing facility, staff model HMO or clinic. This will usually be for clinical pharmacists.

7. Third party payors (health insurance companies, HMOs, etc.) will terminate the professional’s contract or panel membership with that organization.

8. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) will act to revoke the professional’s DEA registration if he or she has one.

9. Many employers will not hire you or will terminate your employment if they discover your license has been disciplined in another state.

What You Should Do.

– Don’t take the easy way out by immediately relinquishing your license if you are notified you are under investigation.

– Don’t hide your head in the sand by thinking the case will just go away on its own.

– Don’t take the easy way out. If you are innocent of the charges, request a formal hearing and contest the charges; defend yourself.

– Do not request an informal hearing or a settlement agreement in which you admit the facts alleged against you are all true. If you do this, you are “pleading guilty.”

– Do immediately seek the advice of an attorney who has experience in such professional licensing matters and administrative hearings. They are out there, but you may have to search for one. Do this as soon as you get notice of any investigation and especially before you have talked to or made any statement (including a written one) to any investigator.

– Do purchase professional liability insurance that includes legal defense coverage for any professional license investigation against you, whether it is related to a malpractice claim or not. This insurance is cheap and will provide needed legal assistance at the time when you may be out of a job and not have money to hire an attorney. Beware of the insurance policy that only covers professional license defense if it is related to a malpractice claim.

Get Your Own Professional Liability Insurance.

We strongly encourage all licensed health professionals and facilities to purchase their own, independent insurance coverage. Make sure it covers professional license defense under all circumstances. Make sure you have enough coverage to actually get you through a hearing. $25,000 coverage for just professional licensure defense is the absolute minimum you should purchase; $50,000 may be adequate but $75,000 or $100,000 may be what you really need in such a situation. For a few dollars more (and I do mean only a few) you can usually purchase the higher limits.

Also, I will repeat, make sure it covers your legal defense in an administrative disciplinary proceeding against your license, even if there is no malpractice claim filed against you or likely to be filed against you.

We also recommend that you purchase coverage through an insurance company that allows you to select your own attorney and does not make you use one that the insurance company picks for you.

Companies we have encountered in the past who provide an inexpensive top quality insurance product for professional license defense costs include: CPH & Associates Insurance, Healthcare Providers Organization (HPSO) Insurance and Lloyd’s of London Insurance.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Pharmacies and Pharmacists.

The Health Law Firm represents pharmacists and pharmacies in DEA investigations, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, administrative hearings, inspections and audits. The firm’s 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.

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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2012 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By The Health Law Firm|2013-06-24T09:00:29-04:00May 15, 2018|Categories: Florida Board of Pharmacy, Pharmacist, Pharmacy, Pharmacy Law|Tags: Administrative Hearing, and Lloyd's of London Insurance, CPH & Associates Insurance, defense attorney, defense lawyer, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Department of Health investigation of a pharmacist, Department of Health investigation of a pharmacy, disciplinary relinquishment, discipline on a pharmacist license, exclusion from the Medicare Program, Healthcare Providers Organization (HPSO) Insurance, investigation of a pharmacist, investigation of a pharmacy, List of Excluded Individuals and Entities, Office of the Inspector General (OIG), pharmacist, pharmacist attorney, pharmacist excluded from the Medicare Program, pharmacist lawyer, pharmacist license, pharmacy, pharmacy attorney, pharmacy lawyer, professional licensing matter, resignation of a pharmacist license, the health law firm, voluntary relinquishment, voluntary relinquishment of a pharmacist license|0 Comments

Jury Awards Walgreens Customer $1.44 Million Over HIPAA Violation

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

An Indiana jury awarded a Walgreens customer $1.44 million on July 26, 2013, over a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) violation, according to the Indianapolis Star. The Walgreens pharmacist was found to have violated the customer’s privacy by looking up and sharing the customer’s prescription history with others. The lawsuit alleged that there was a relationship between the pharmacist, her husband and the husband’s ex-girlfriend (who was the customer). The customer/ex-girlfriend was the plaintiff in the lawsuit.

Click here to read the entire article from the Indianapolis Star.

Details of the Lawsuit.

According to the American Bar Association, the lawsuit alleged the pharmacist was married to the customer’s ex-boyfriend at the time the pharmacist viewed her prescription records. The pharmacist admitted to showing the confidential information to her husband, who shares a child with the customer/plaintiff. In doing this, the pharmacist breeched her statutory and common law duties of confidentiality and privacy.

Click here to read the entire article from the American Bar Association.

Walgreens Found Negligent.

The jury found Walgreens negligent in training and supervising the pharmacist. The pharmacist admitted she was aware of the pharmacy’s privacy policy and knew she was violating it. Walgreens claims the pharmacist has been appropriately disciplined.

Deadline to Comply with Omnibus Rule Close-Are You Ready?

The Department of Health and Humans Services (HHS) released stronger rules and protections governing patient privacy on January 17, 2013. This omnibus rule strengthens the privacy and security protection established under HIPAA. Physicians, hospitals, clinics, health care providers and their business associates need to take into account the corrections as they work to update business associate agreements, policies, practices and training to comply with the rule changes by the September 23, 2013, deadline. To learn more on the omnibus rule changes, click here to read a previous blog.

Be Proactive-Get a HIPAA Risk Assessment.

A HIPAA risk assessment can significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate, your exposure to regulatory and litigation sanctions. It will identify areas for improvement and allow them to be corrected before an auditor finds the issue and causes unwanted problems for you and your practice.

HIPAA laws have most likely changed since you last edited your privacy forms and procedures. Many health providers simply don’t have the time to re-review their policies and revise documents. In a perfect practice, this would be done every six months.

To learn more on HIPAA risk assessments, click here.

Contact a Health Law Attorney Experienced in Defending HIPAA Complaints and Violations.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm represent physicians, medical groups, nursing homes, home health agencies, pharmacies, hospitals and other healthcare providers and institutions in investigating and defending alleged HIPAA complaints and violations and in preparing Corrective Action Plans (CAPs).

For more information about HIPAA violations, electronic health records or corrective action plans (CAPs) please visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com or call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001.

Comments?

What are your thoughts on this HIPAA violation? Do you think Walgreens failed to train and supervise the pharmacist? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Sources:

Neil, Martha. “Walgreens Must Pay Customer $1.44M After Pharmacy Shared Her Prescription Records.” American Bar Association. (July 29, 2013). From: http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/jury_says_walgreens_must_pay_1.44m_because_pharmacist_gave_her_husband/

Evans, Tim. “Walgreens Must Pay Woman $1.44 Million Over HIPAA Violation.” Indianapolis Star. (July 26, 2013). From: http://www.indystar.com/article/20130726/NEWS/307260079/

About the Authors: Lance O. Leider is an attorney with 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 Avenue, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999. Copyright © 1996-2012 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

“Operation Main Pain” Targets More Than 60 in Fraudulent Prescription Drug Ring

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

The Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office announced a fraudulent prescription drug ring bust that spanned throughout Sarasota and Manatee counties in Florida, on September 19, 2013. So far, 61 people, including the alleged ringleader have been arrested. The operation has been dubbed “Operation Main Pain” by the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office.

Click here to view the press release from the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office.

Investigation Unveiled Complex Fraudulent Drug Ring.

The investigation began in July 2011, when a fraudulent oxycodone prescription was noticed at a CVS pharmacy in Sarasota County. When more of the same fake prescriptions were presented at the CVS pharmacy, the prescriptions were identified as suspicious and declined, according to the Bradenton Herald.

Investigators uncovered that the fraudulent prescription drug ring involved several recruiters who employed runners to enter into pharmacies multiple times a day with identical prescriptions. The recruiters had runners fill fake prescriptions primarily at two pharmacies, one in Venice, Florida, and one in Sarasota, Florida.

According to the Bradenton Herald, detectives say the ringleader wrote 220 phony prescriptions that were exchanged for nearly 20,000 oxycodone pills.

To read the Bradenton Herald article, click here.

Charges Against Those Involved Include Trafficking.

According to the Herald-Tribune, the arrests have been ongoing for two years, with the latest arrests made as recently as September 2013. The ringleader is charged with conspiracy to traffic in oxycodone. The other 60 people arrested face multiple counts of obtaining oxycodone by fraud and trafficking charges.

Sarasota Sheriff Expresses Disappointment in Two Main Pharmacies Accused of Filling Fake Prescriptions.

The two pharmacies targeted by the drug ring allegedly filled more than 100 of the fraudulent prescriptions in a short amount of time. According to the Herald-Tribune, the Sarasota Sheriff’s Office works to educate pharmacies to notice warning signs. The sheriff stated that the pharmacies should have notified the authorities since there were hundreds of similar prescriptions, being brought in by similar customers, all allegedly written by the same doctor. According to the Herald-Tribune, the pharmacies are currently being investigated.

Click here to read the article from the Herald-Tribune.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Pharmacies and Pharmacists.

The Health Law Firm represents pharmacists and pharmacies in DEA investigations, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, administrative hearings, inspections and audits. The firm’s 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.

Comments?

Given the information in the blog, do you think the two main pharmacies that were filling the fraudulent prescriptions should have notified the authorities? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Sources:

Rose, Wendy. “Operation Main Pain Includes 61 Arrests.” Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office. (September 19, 2013). From: http://www.sarasotasheriff.org/press_detail.asp?R=13-182

Johnson, Elizabeth. “More Than 60 Arrested in Drug Fraud Ring.” Herald-Tribune. (September 19, 2013). From: http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20130919/ARTICLE/130919529?tc=ar

Bradenton Herald. “61 Charged with Prescription Drug Fraud in Manatee, Sarasota.” Bradenton Herald. (September 19, 2013). From: http://www.bradenton.com/2013/09/19/4726950/61-charged-with-prescription-drug.html

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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2012 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Florida Board of Pharmacy Updates Record Retention Rules for Pharmacies

By Lance O. Leider, J.D., The Health Law Firm

At its meeting held on February 12, 2014, the Florida Board of Pharmacy voted to approve language changes to a number of rules. Specifically, those changes were put into effect to establish a uniform four-year retention policy for pharmacy records.

Previously the Board’s rules were not consistent with respect to how long pharmacies were required to retain different types of records.

When approving new rules or changes to existing rules, administrative bodies are required to evaluate the regulatory costs of the changes. In examining these costs the Board found that any financial costs imposed upon small businesses would be balanced by the efficiencies created by a uniform retention period.

Board of Pharmacy Voted to Change the Wording in These Rules.

Below is a list of the administrative rules that were changed:

– Standards for the Approval of Registered Pharmacy Technician Training Programs
Rule 64B16-26.351, Florida Administrative Code

– Standards for Approval of Courses and Providers
Rule 64B16-26.601, Florida Administrative Code

– Continuing Education Records Requirements
Rule 64B16-26.603, Florida Administrative Code

– General Terms and Conditions to be Followed by a Pharmacist When Ordering and Dispensing Approved Medicinal Drug Products
Rule 64B16-27.210, Florida Administrative Code

– Standards of Practice – Continuous Quality Improvement Program
Rule 64B16-27.300, Florida Administrative Code

– Requirement for Patient Records
Rule 64B16-27.800, Florida Administrative Code

– Change of Ownership
Rule 64B16-28.2021, Florida Administrative Code

– Centralized Prescription Filling, Delivering and Returning
Rule 64B16-28.450, Florida Administrative Code

– Transmission of Starter Dose Prescriptions for Patients in Class I Institutional or Modified II B Facilities
Rule 64B16-28.503, Florida Administrative Code

– Class II Institutional Pharmacies
Rule 64B16-28.605, Florida Administrative Code

– Remote Medication Order Processing for Class II Institutional Pharmacies
Rule 64B16-28.606, Florida Administrative Code

– Automated Pharmacy System – Long-Term Care, hospice, and Prison
Rule 64B16-28.607, Florida Administrative Code

– Modified Class II Institutional Pharmacies
Rule 64B16-28.702, Florida Administrative Code

– Record Maintenance for Animal Shelter Permits
Rule 64B16-29.0041, Florida Administrative Code

Make Sure Your Facility is Prepared.

While these rule changes are not final, it is important to recognize if they will be affecting your facility. You should also be making arrangements in your facility to ensure that there is enough computer disk space or physical space to retain these records. Keep in mind that these records retention rules are in addition to any others imposed by other Florida or federal statutes or rules relating to controlled substances or other pharmacy practices.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Pharmacies and Pharmacists.

The Health Law Firm represents pharmacists and pharmacies in DEA investigations, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, administrative hearings, inspections and audits. The firm’s 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.

Comments?

How do you feel about the requirement of pharmacy records to be retained for four years? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

About the Author: Lance O. Leider is an attorney with 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 Avenue, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.

By The Health Law Firm|2014-02-25T09:00:22-05:00May 15, 2018|Categories: Florida Board of Pharmacy, Pharmacist, Pharmacy, Pharmacy Law|Tags: Board of Pharmacy, defense attorney, defense lawyer, health law firm, how long do pharmacies retain records, how long to pharmacies keep records, pharmacist, pharmacist attorney, pharmacist lawyer, pharmacy, pharmacy attorney, pharmacy law, pharmacy lawyer, pharmacy record retention, pharmacy records, the health law firm|1 Comment

Florida Legislature Reforms Pharmacy Benefit Manager Audit Practices

According to the Florida Legislature, it’s time for pharmacists to focus on their patients instead of paperwork. On June 13, 2014, Florida Governor Rick Scott signed Florida Senate Bill 702 into law. This law introduces clear guidelines of acceptable audit practices of pharmacies in the Sunshine State.

There are more than 2,700 pharmacies across Florida that are routinely evaluated by Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs). The purpose of these audits is to verify that certain claims are submitted and handled properly. If a PBM audit uncovers fraud or abuse, the pharmacy will be subject to penalties, including reimbursement of amounts paid. With the increase of rules regulating pharmacies, these audits have progressively become more time consuming for pharmacists.

Florida SB 702 becomes effective on October 1, 2014. To read a summary of the law, click here.

What’s the Need of the New Law?

In the United States, a PBM is most often a third party administrator of prescription drug programs. The PBM is primarily responsible for processing and paying prescription drug claims.
Currently, PBMs have broad discretion to penalize pharmacies. This means that pharmacies can be forced to pay thousands of dollars as the result of basic clerical or typographical mistakes, many of which are not the fault of the pharmacist or pharmacy staff. This law was enacted to provide reasonable standards for pharmacy audits while allowing PBMs to continue penalizing for true fraud and abuse.

Pharmacy Rights Included in New Law.

SB 702 makes common-sense auditing standards that include:

–   At least seven days advance notice before an on-site audit is conducted;
–   On-site audits scheduled after the first three days of the month;
–   A limit on the audit period of 24 months after the date claim is submitted;
–   Audits requiring clinical judgment must be conducted by or with a pharmacist;
–   Use of written practitioner records to validate pharmacy records in accordance with state and federal law;
–   Reimbursement of claims retroactively denied for clerical, typographical or computer errors unless pharmacy has a pattern of fraudulent billing;
–   Delivery of initial audit reports to pharmacists within 120 days after an audit is completed;
–   Receipt of final audit report within six months of the preliminary report;
–   Allowing 10 days for pharmacists to provide documentation to address any discrepancies found during an audit;
–   Prohibiting the use of extrapolations in auditing claims; and
–   The Office of Insurance Regulation will study pharmacy complaints of willful violations of audit provisions by PBMs.

Stipulation of Rights.

The rights listed above do not apply to audits that are based on suspicions of fraud or willful misrepresentation; audits of claims paid for by federally funded programs; or concurrent reviews or desk audits that occur within three business days after transmission where no chargeback or recoupment is demanded.

An entity that audits a pharmacy located within a Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team Task Force area designated by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is not required to provide seven days prior notice of an audit if the pharmacy has been a member of a credentialed provider network for less than 12 months.

What This Means for You.

For once there is a new law that does not make a pharmacist’s job more complicated. This law may actually alleviate some of the stress that comes with dealing with an audit. We’re hoping with the implementation of this law pharmacists will be able to spend more time focusing on patient care.

Comments?

What do you think of this new law? Will it affect your pharmacy? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Pharmacies and Pharmacists.

The Health Law Firm represents pharmacists and pharmacies in DEA, DOH and FDA investigations, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, administrative hearings, inspections and audits. The firm’s 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.

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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2012 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By The Health Law Firm|2014-07-07T09:00:44-04:00May 15, 2018|Categories: Florida Board of Pharmacy, Florida Legislature, Pharmacist, Pharmacy, Pharmacy Audit, Pharmacy Law|Tags: defense attorney, defense lawyer, Florida governor, Florida legislature, Florida pharmacy, health law firm, House Bill 745, pharmacist, pharmacist attorney, pharmacist lawyer, pharmacy, pharmacy audit, pharmacy benefit manager, pharmacy evaluation, Rick Scott, Senate Bill 702, the health law firm|0 Comments

OIG Issues Advisory Opinion to Specialty Pharmacy for Support Service Payments

By Lenis L. Archer, J.D., M.P.H., The Health Law Firm

There is an inherent risk in entering into financial arrangements where payments to a service provider are only made when a referral is generated. On August 15, 2014, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) made this perfectly clear in an unfavorable advisory opinion issued to a specialty pharmacy that wanted to pay local retail pharmacies for providing support services to it.

Background of Request for OIG Advisory Opinion.

According to the OIG, the requestor, a specialty pharmacy, dispenses specialty pharmaceuticals used to treat a variety of chronic and life-threatening illnesses. The specialty pharmacy stated that the drugs offered at its establishment are frequently unavailable to retail pharmacies. In light of this, the specialty pharmacy asked whether it would be permissible to enter into agreements with various local pharmacies in which the specialty pharmacy would provide its specialty drug prescriptions to local pharmacies’ patients. Under the proposed contractual arrangement, the local pharmacies would be required to provide various support services, including:

1. Accepting the prescription from the patient or prescriber;
2. Gathering patient and prescriber demographic information;
3. Recording patient-specific history and use, including drug names, strength and directions;
4. Patient counseling;
5. Informing the patients about access to specialty drugs, including the availability from pharmacies other than the specialty pharmacy;
6. Obtaining patient consent to forward the prescription to the specialty pharmacy;
7. Transferring prescription information to the specialty pharmacy; and
8. Providing ongoing patient assessments for subsequent refills.

The retail pharmacies would be paid a “per-fill fee” by the specialty pharmacy at the time that the initial prescription was transmitted and upon each subsequent refill.

OIG Issued Negative Opinion Due to Anti-Kickback Statute.

The OIG issued an unfavorable opinion for this proposed agreement, concluding that the federal Anti-Kickback Statute was implicated because the specialty pharmacy would pay a per-fill fee for support services each time a local pharmacy referred a specialty drug prescription. After evaluating the arrangement, the OIG concluded that the per-fill fees were inherently subject to abuse because they were paid only when the support services provided by the retail pharmacy resulted in a referral to the specialty pharmacy. Thus, the OIG found that such a per-fill fee is directly linked to business generated by the local pharmacy for the specialty pharmacy, and could influence the local pharmacy’s referral decisions. OIG noted that the Anti-Kickback Statute is implicated if one purpose of the remuneration is to generate referrals.

Click here to read OIG Advisory Opinion No. 14-06.

Exceptions to Anti-Kickback Laws.

Like many other regulatory frameworks, the Anti-Kickback Statute has exceptions. The law provides a number of safe harbors to the rule which allow otherwise impermissible referral arrangements to pass muster.

Because the exceptions are numerous and often subject to change, it is highly recommended that any new business arrangement, or substantial change to an existing one, is reviewed by a health law attorney experienced in the area of Anti-Referral and Anti-Kickback Laws.

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

We routinely provide deposition coverage to pharmacists, pharmacies and other health professionals being deposed in criminal cases, negligence cases, civil cases or disciplinary cases involving other health professionals.

We can review business referral arrangements and provide legal counsel on whether they are not in violation of federal and state anti-referral laws.

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:

Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General. “OIG Advisory Opinion No. 14-06” (August 15, 2014). From: https://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/docs/advisoryopinions/2014/AdvOpn14-06.pdf

Ciesla, Frank, Christian, Beth, and Burd, Ari. “Office of Inspector General (OIG) Issues Unfavorable Advisory Opinion to Specialty Pharmacy for Support Service Payments.” The National Law Review. (August 18, 2014). From: http://www.natlawreview.com/article/office-inspector-general-oig-issues-unfavorable-advisory-opinion-to-specialty-pharma

About the Author: Lenis L. Archer is as attorney with 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., Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By The Health Law Firm|2014-08-28T09:00:40-04:00May 15, 2018|Categories: Pharmacist, Pharmacy, Pharmacy Law|Tags: advisory opinion, anti-kickback statute, anti-referral statute, Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General, pharmacist, pharmacy, pharmacy law, specialty pharmacy, stark law|0 Comments

Selling Tobacco Can Get You Penalized By Insurance Panels

By Lance O. Leider, J.D., The Health Law Firm

Beware: selling cigarettes could burn a hole in your pocket.

The CVS Health Corporation (CVS), the nation’s second-largest drug store, is currently in the midst of launching a tobacco-free prescription-drug network. The company announced in October 2014, that it will begin offering a tobacco-free pharmacy plan to employers, unions, and insurance companies for which its Caremark arm manages prescription benefits. CVS is slapping patients with an extra co-payment “penalty” if they purchase their medications from pharmacies that sell tobacco products, regardless of whether the patient is a tobacco user.

According to US News, by adding a variable co-payment of up to $15, CVS hopes that this new strategy, comparable to a narrow network insurance design, will perpetuate the company’s health-and-wellness based initiatives.

The new network will start in 2015. Customers will receive a list of participating pharmacies before any network change will take place.

Click here to read more from US News.

The Tobacco-Free Retail Trend.

Target and CVS have become the poster children for tobacco-free retailers. In 1996, Target spearheaded the fight against tobacco by eliminating all sales of the toxic substance. In September 2014, the CVS Corporation followed suit and completed its tobacco-free overhaul by removing all tobacco products from store shelves across the nation.

The tobacco-free pharmacy networks would include CVS and Target nationally, as well as local or regional pharmacies such as independent pharmacies that abstain from tobacco sales. Walgreens and Walmart pharmacies, two large-scale rival drug chains that sell tobacco, as well as any other grocery or community pharmacy, should expect patient penalties and negative impacts on prescription-drug revenue.

Those Participating in the Tobacco-Free Network.

According to Yahoo! Finance, CVS representatives said the network was created in a response to pharmacy benefit management (PBM) clients that indicated interest in tobacco-free pharmacies. The tobacco-free network will only be used by the PBM customers that voluntarily participate.

The first employer to sign on is the city of Philadelphia, as it promotes a tobacco-free workforce. Philadelphia officials estimate that between 150 and 200 CVS pharmacies will participate in the Philadelphia network.

To read more on this topic from Yahoo! Finance, click here.

Sincere Motives or a Monopoly in the Making?

There are a myriad of arguments regarding CVS’ genuine motive behind the tobacco-free network. Health benefit analysts argue that the network is a disguised anti-competition scheme. With the announcement of the new network plan, CVS opens itself up to criticism for appearing to steer patients to CVS pharmacies, or strong arm the competition into giving up lucrative tobacco revenue. Although the corporation denies these claims of ulterior motives, Dave Balto, a former policy director at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission argued that “…It’s really another effort to limit the ability of their rivals to effectively compete.”

Independent pharmacies are also questioning the industry benefits of such a plan. Small, local pharmacies that have not carried tobacco products for years may be overlooked by the consumers knowingly aware of CVS as a tobacco-free drug store. These mom-and-pop pharmacies will be forced to spend a pretty penny on increased marketing to stand on their own two feet against these mass retail chains.

The Narrow Network Comparison.

Many critics argue that the new CVS plan could be considered a narrow network strategy. A narrow network applies to any health insurance plan that places constraints on doctors and hospitals that are available to their beneficiaries. Typically plans will not cover medical services received out-of-network or they will increase co-payments.

These designs are becoming more common for insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers. By limiting the choices, insurers say they can better focus on the quality of medical care that is delivered to plan customers.

Comments?

What is your opinion of the new CVS tobacco-free network plan? Do you think it will be beneficial for overall community health or more detrimental to the livelihood of small pharmacies? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Pharmacies and Pharmacists.

The Health Law Firm represents pharmacists and pharmacies in DEA, DOH and FDA investigations, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, administrative hearings, inspections and audits. The firm’s 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 http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Silverman, Ed and Ziobro, Paul. “CVS Plays Hardball with Rival Drug Chains.” (October 20, 2014). From: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/cvs-plays-hardball-rival-drug-231400764.html

Murphy, Tom. “CVS Health Stretches Anti-tobacco Push to New Prescription Drug Network.” (October 21, 2014). From: http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2014/10/21/cvs-develops-tobacco-free-prescription-network

About the Author: Lance O. Leider is an attorney with 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., Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

South Florida Man Pleads Guilty to Fraudulently Working as a Pharmacist

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

On July 24, 2012, a 49-year-old man from Ruskin in South Fla., pleaded guilty in federal court to fraudulently working as a Central Florida pharmacist from 2000 to 2009, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ) in a press release.

Fake Pharmacist was Working at Central Florida Pharmacies.

Prosecutors said this man worked at pharmacies throughout Central Florida, including CVS pharmacy and Walgreens. According to the Orlando Sentinel, while working at one of the pharmacies, he gave a customer the incorrect medication, causing that person to suffer a severe reaction and stroke.

Alleged Identity Theft to Obtain Pharmacist License.

Allegedly, the man fraudulently obtained a pharmacist license in September of 2000 from the State Department of Health (DOH) by using the name, date of birth, Social Security number and pharmacy education information of a licensed pharmacist.

The fake pharmacist was able to renew the license and was allegedly receiving paychecks from pharmacies through the mail.

Will The Real Pharmacist Please Stand Up?

Local authorities began investigating the South Florida man after a legitimate pharmacist in Arizona reported that his identity had been stolen.

The legitimate pharmacist first learned in 2007 that someone was using his identity in Florida when the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) contacted him about undeclared earnings. He had never worked in Florida and learned someone was posing as him and working as a pharmacist under his name, according to the court records.

To see the full press release on this case, click here.

A Long List of Charges Could Mean Prison Time.

The fraudulent pharmacist pled guilty to mail fraud, aggravated identity theft, and money laundering in Orlando. He faces up to 20 years in federal prison for the mail fraud charge, 10 years for the money laundering charge, and a minimum of two years for any other sentence for the aggravated identity theft charge, the Justice release said.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigated the case with assistance from the Florida Department of Health’s Division of Medical Quality Assurance.

Click here to see our experience representing pharmacists and pharmacies.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Representing Pharmacists and Pharmacies.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to pharmacists and pharmacies in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) 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.

Sources:

FBI.gov. “Pharmacist Impersonator Charged with Mail Fraud, Identity Theft, and Money Laundering.” FBI, Tampa Division. (July 24, 2012). From Press Release: http://www.fbi.gov/tampa/press-releases/2012/pharmacist-impersonator-pleads-guilty-to-mail-fraud-identity-theft-and-money-laundering

TBO.com. “Ruskin Man Admits Identity Theft in Fake Pharmacist Case.” Tampa Bay Online. (July, 24, 2012). From: http://www2.tbo.com/news/health-4-you/2012/jul/24/ruskin-man-admits-identity-theft-in-fake-pharmacis-ar-440248/

Pavuk, Amy. “Feds: Man Stole Pharmacist’s Identity, Worked at Pharmacies Across Metro Orlando.” Orlando Sentinel. (July 24, 2012). From: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-07-24/news/os-pharmacist-stolen-identity-20120724_1_pharmacies-illinois-court-federal-court

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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2012 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By The Health Law Firm|2012-08-28T15:30:40-04:00May 15, 2018|Categories: Legal Defense for Pharmacists, Pharmacist, Pharmacy, Pharmacy Law|Tags: criminal charges, dea, DEA investigation, DEA number, department of health, Department of Justice, doh, DOJ, FBI, identity theft, investigation, legal defense for pharmacists, legal representation for pharmacists, license revoked, pharmacies, pharmacy investigation, quality assurance|0 Comments