Florida Attorney Says AHCA Must Put Medicaid Final Orders Online

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

Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) has come under fire for failing to make Medicaid final orders accessible to the public. On April 11, 2023, an attorney asked a Florida appeals court to revive her suit against AHCA, trying to force AHCA into compliance with state public records laws.

Attorney Nancy Wright says the AHCA orders fall under a state law that requires all proceedings determined by a state agency to be placed into a centralized electronic database accessible to the public. This would allow citizens and healthcare providers more accessible access to those decisions and transparency when understanding Medicaid policies and decisions made by AHCA.

Access to Medicaid Final Orders.

The plaintiff’s attorney argued before a three-judge panel of the court of appeal that she should not be required to pay hundreds of dollars to gain access to Medicaid final orders to prepare for clients’ Medicaid hearings when the law requires the agency to publish these. The attorney further argued that this fee was an unfair and unjustified barrier to justice and that she should be given free access to these orders to ensure that she could provide the best possible representation for her clients.

More Details of the Case.

The Florida Health Justice Project and the National Health Law Program filed the lawsuit against AHCA on behalf of Wright in December 2020 in the First District Court of Appeal of Florida.
“[Medicaid law’s] notorious complexity and rapid regulatory changes put even lawyers on edge,” she said in a statement at the time she filed her suit. “AHCA’s unwillingness to make their [sic] final orders accessible means that I am not able to fully advise my clients on how and why decisions on services are being made. For the many enrollees who are unrepresented, this lack of transparency makes a complicated system almost impossible to navigate.”

Click here to view the press release from The Florida Health Justice Project.

However, the trial court sided with AHCA and granted summary judgment to the agency.

The Appeal.

The Elder Law Section of the Florida Bar expressed their support for Wright and submitted an amicus brief on appeal. They highlighted that the Florida Department of Children and Families regulates Medicaid eligibility proceedings with the same law that provides authority to AHCA. Furthermore, the Department publishes its final orders in an electronic database, making them readily available to the public.

However, accessing these same orders on Medicaid coverage requires a public records request which can be costly and time-consuming. The Elder Law Section argued in its brief that this disparity is unfair as it burdens those attempting to gain access to said records. The brief further suggested that upholding the trial court’s summary judgment would only perpetuate this inequality of access to public records.

To learn more, read the complaint in full here.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Handling Medicaid Audits, Investigations, and other Legal Proceedings

Physicians, therapists, counselors and other health professionals who accept Medicaid are routinely audited by the Medicaid Program to detect any overpayments or fraudulent claims. Medicaid fraud is a serious crime and is vigorously investigated by the state Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU), the Agency for Healthcare Administration (AHCA), Program Integrity Contractors (PICs), the FBI, and the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Often other state and federal agencies, including the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), and other law enforcement agencies may also participate. Don’t wait until it’s too late. If you are concerned of any possible violations and would like a confidential consultation, contact a qualified health law attorney familiar with medical billing and audits today. Often Medicaid fraud criminal charges arise out of routine Medicaid audits, probe audits, or patient complaints.

The Health Law Firm’s attorneys routinely represent physicians, dentists, orthodontists, medical groups, clinics, pharmacies, mental health counselors, therapists, home health care agencies, nursing homes, group homes and other healthcare providers in Medicaid and Medicare investigations, audits and recovery actions.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or toll free at (888) 331-6620 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 or Toll-Free: (888) 331-6620.

Attorney Positions with The Health Law Firm. The Health Law Firm is always looking for qualified attorneys interested in health law practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. If you are a member of The Florida Bar and are interested, forward a cover letter and your resume to: [email protected] or fax to: (407) 331-3030.

“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 © 2023 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Florida Attorney Says AHCA Must Put Medicaid Final Orders Online

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

Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) has come under fire for failing to make Medicaid final orders accessible to the public. On April 11, 2023, an attorney asked a Florida appeals court to revive her suit against AHCA, trying to force AHCA into compliance with state public records laws.

Attorney Nancy Wright says the AHCA orders fall under a state law that requires all proceedings determined by a state agency to be placed into a centralized electronic database accessible to the public. This would allow citizens and healthcare providers more accessible access to those decisions and transparency when understanding Medicaid policies and decisions made by AHCA.

Access to Medicaid Final Orders.

The plaintiff’s attorney argued before a three-judge panel of the court of appeal that she should not be required to pay hundreds of dollars to gain access to Medicaid final orders to prepare for clients’ Medicaid hearings when the law requires the agency to publish these. The attorney further argued that this fee was an unfair and unjustified barrier to justice and that she should be given free access to these orders to ensure that she could provide the best possible representation for her clients.

More Details of the Case.

The Florida Health Justice Project and the National Health Law Program filed the lawsuit against AHCA on behalf of Wright in December 2020 in the First District Court of Appeal of Florida.
“[Medicaid law’s] notorious complexity and rapid regulatory changes put even lawyers on edge,” she said in a statement at the time she filed her suit. “AHCA’s unwillingness to make their [sic] final orders accessible means that I am not able to fully advise my clients on how and why decisions on services are being made. For the many enrollees who are unrepresented, this lack of transparency makes a complicated system almost impossible to navigate.”

Click here to view the press release from The Florida Health Justice Project.

However, the trial court sided with AHCA and granted summary judgment to the agency.

The Appeal.

The Elder Law Section of the Florida Bar expressed their support for Wright and submitted an amicus brief on appeal. They highlighted that the Florida Department of Children and Families regulates Medicaid eligibility proceedings with the same law that provides authority to AHCA. Furthermore, the Department publishes its final orders in an electronic database, making them readily available to the public.

However, accessing these same orders on Medicaid coverage requires a public records request which can be costly and time-consuming. The Elder Law Section argued in its brief that this disparity is unfair as it burdens those attempting to gain access to said records. The brief further suggested that upholding the trial court’s summary judgment would only perpetuate this inequality of access to public records.

To learn more, read the complaint in full here.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Handling Medicaid Audits, Investigations, and other Legal Proceedings

Physicians, therapists, counselors and other health professionals who accept Medicaid are routinely audited by the Medicaid Program to detect any overpayments or fraudulent claims. Medicaid fraud is a serious crime and is vigorously investigated by the state Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU), the Agency for Healthcare Administration (AHCA), Program Integrity Contractors (PICs), the FBI, and the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Often other state and federal agencies, including the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), and other law enforcement agencies may also participate. Don’t wait until it’s too late. If you are concerned of any possible violations and would like a confidential consultation, contact a qualified health law attorney familiar with medical billing and audits today. Often Medicaid fraud criminal charges arise out of routine Medicaid audits, probe audits, or patient complaints.

The Health Law Firm’s attorneys routinely represent physicians, dentists, orthodontists, medical groups, clinics, pharmacies, mental health counselors, therapists, home health care agencies, nursing homes, group homes and other healthcare providers in Medicaid and Medicare investigations, audits and recovery actions.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or toll free at (888) 331-6620 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 or Toll-Free: (888) 331-6620.

Attorney Positions with The Health Law Firm. The Health Law Firm is always looking for qualified attorneys interested in health law practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. If you are a member of The Florida Bar and are interested, forward a cover letter and your resume to: [email protected] or fax to: (407) 331-3030.

“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 © 2023 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Florida Attorney Says AHCA Must Put Medicaid Final Orders Online

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

Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) has come under fire for failing to make Medicaid final orders accessible to the public. On April 11, 2023, an attorney asked a Florida appeals court to revive her suit against AHCA, trying to force AHCA into compliance with state public records laws.

Attorney Nancy Wright says the AHCA orders fall under a state law that requires all proceedings determined by a state agency to be placed into a centralized electronic database accessible to the public. This would allow citizens and healthcare providers more accessible access to those decisions and transparency when understanding Medicaid policies and decisions made by AHCA.

Access to Medicaid Final Orders.

The plaintiff’s attorney argued before a three-judge panel of the court of appeal that she should not be required to pay hundreds of dollars to gain access to Medicaid final orders to prepare for clients’ Medicaid hearings when the law requires the agency to publish these. The attorney further argued that this fee was an unfair and unjustified barrier to justice. She should be given free access to these orders to provide her clients the best possible representation.

More Details of the Case.

The Florida Health Justice Project and the National Health Law Program filed the lawsuit against AHCA on behalf of Wright in December 2020 in the First District Court of Appeal of Florida.
“[Medicaid law’s] notorious complexity and rapid regulatory changes put even lawyers on edge,” she said in a statement when she filed her suit. “AHCA’s unwillingness to make their [sic] final orders accessible means that I cannot fully advise my clients on how and why decisions on services are being made. This lack of transparency makes a complicated system almost impossible to navigate for the many unrepresented enrollees.”

View the press release from The Florida Health Justice Project.

However, the trial court sided with AHCA and granted summary judgment to the agency.

The Appeal.

The Elder Law Section of the Florida Bar expressed their support for Wright and submitted an amicus brief on appeal. They highlighted that the Florida Department of Children and Families regulates Medicaid eligibility proceedings with the same law that provides authority to AHCA. Furthermore, the Department publishes its final orders in an electronic database, making them readily available to the public.

However, accessing these same orders on Medicaid coverage requires a public records request which can be costly and time-consuming. In its brief, the Elder Law Section argued that this disparity is unfair as it burdens those attempting to access said records. The brief further suggested that upholding the trial court’s summary judgment would only perpetuate this inequality of access to public records.

To learn more, read the complaint in full here.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Handling Medicaid Audits, Investigations, and other Legal Proceedings

Physicians, therapists, counselors, and other health professionals who accept Medicaid are routinely audited by the Medicaid Program to detect overpayments or fraudulent claims. Medicaid fraud is a severe crime and is vigorously investigated by the state Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU), the Agency for Healthcare Administration (AHCA), Program Integrity Contractors (PICs), the FBI, and the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Other state and federal agencies may also participate, including the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) and other law enforcement agencies. Don’t wait until it’s too late. If you are concerned of any possible violations and would like a confidential consultation, contact a qualified health law attorney familiar with medical billing and audits today. Often Medicaid fraud criminal charges arise out of routine Medicaid audits, probe audits, or patient complaints.

The Health Law Firm’s attorneys routinely represent physicians, dentists, orthodontists, medical groups, clinics, pharmacies, mental health counselors, therapists, home healthcare agencies, nursing homes, group homes, and other healthcare providers in Medicaid and Medicare investigations, audits, and recovery actions.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or toll-free at (888) 331-6620 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 or Toll-Free: (888) 331-6620.

Attorney Positions with The Health Law Firm. The Health Law Firm is always looking for qualified attorneys interested in health law practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. If you are a member of The Florida Bar and are interested, forward a cover letter and your resume to: [email protected] or fax to: (407) 331-3030.

“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 © 2023 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

DOJ Withdraws Outdated Antitrust Policy Statements For Healthcare Industry; “Safety Zones” Abolished

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

On February 3, 2023, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) withdrew three “outdated” antitrust policy statements applicable to healthcare markets. These have been in effect and relied upon for decades by those in the healthcare industry. According to a statement it issued, the Division determined that withdrawing the three statements is the best course of action for promoting competition and transparency.

Over the past three decades since this guidance was first released, the healthcare landscape has changed significantly. As a result, the statements are overly permissive on specific subjects, such as information sharing, and no longer serve their intended purposes of providing encompassing guidance to the public on relevant healthcare competition issues in today’s environment.

The Withdrawn Policy Statements.

When the DOJ and FTC issued the Withdrawn Statements, they did so to make healthcare more accessible and affordable. Specifically:

1.    The 1993 Department of Justice and FTC Antitrust Enforcement Policy Statements in the Health Care Area (“1993 Statement”);

2.    The 1996 Statements of Antitrust Enforcement Policy in Health Care (“1996 Statement”) (which revised and expanded the 1993 statement); and

3.    The 2011 Statement of Antitrust Enforcement Policy Regarding Accountable Care Organizations Participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (“2011 Statement”).[2]

The withdrawal of the statements is effective immediately. In place of the guidance, DOJ evaluates behavior on a “case-by-case enforcement approach.”

Key Takeaways For the Future.

The withdrawal of the DOJ’s prior statements establishing information-sharing “safety zones” creates uncertainty around whether the DOJ will now treat exchanges of information encompassed by these safety zones as problematic. Moreover, there is considerable doubt about what conditions must be satisfied for information sharing to be considered lawful by DOJ and the FTC in the healthcare industry and other industries. Therefore, in the future, companies may want to take the following steps:

1. Examine the extent of reliance on the safe-harbor criteria. Companies that relied on now-withdrawn safe harbors to engage in information exchanges (including industry indexes or benchmarks) involving old, aggregated data should reassess antitrust risk using the traditional rule of reason criteria. In addition, companies that relied on the now-withdrawn joint purchasing safe harbor also should reassess risk, even though DOJ did not specifically signal a greater emphasis on enforcement in this area.

2. Re-assess the antitrust risk of information sharing even if the company did not rely on the safe harbor. DOJ’s announcement signals that it will be more skeptical of some factors that traditionally were seen to decrease the antitrust risk of information exchanges, including lack of industry concentration, use of old data, and use of third parties to aggregate data. Accordingly, a reassessment is recommended to the extent a company’s analysis or antitrust policies relied on these factors.

3. Carefully review and revise policies. Companies should periodically review their compliance policies and employee training to reflect DOJ’s emerging guidance on information exchanges.

Click here to fully view the DOJ’s press release to learn more.

Contact a Health Care Attorney Experienced in Negotiating and Evaluating Physician and Health Professional’s Complex Business Litigation, Transactions.

The Health Law Firm provides legal services for all healthcare providers and professionals. This includes physicians, nurses, dentists, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, durable medical equipment suppliers (DME), medical students and interns, hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, pain management clinics, nursing homes, and any other health care provider.

The services we provide include reviewing and negotiating contracts, preparing contracts, helping employers and employees enforce contracts, litigation and defense of enforcement of restrictive covenants (covenants not to compete), complex business and health litigation, administrative hearings, advice on setting aside or voiding contracts, litigation of contracts (in the state or federal court), business transactions, professional license defense, opinion letters, representation in investigations, fair hearing defense, representation in peer review and clinical privileges hearings, Medicare and Medicaid audits.

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:

Zaslavsky, Sergei. “DOJ Withdraws Longstanding Policy Statements on Information Sharing and Eliminates Safe Harbors.” O’Melveny. (February 6, 2023). Web.

Berger,Lee.”Tracking Antitrust Agencies’ Pursuit Of Biden’s Labor Mandate.” American Hospital Law360. (February 5, 2023). Web.

Kully, David. Another One Bites the Dust: DOJ Pulls 3 Policy Statements, Leaving Trade Associations Guessing.” Holland & Knight. (February 5, 2023). 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 or Toll-Free: (888) 331-6620.

Current Open Positions with The Health Law Firm. The Health Law Firm always seeks qualified individuals interested in health law. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. If you are a current member of The Florida Bar or a qualified professional who is interested, please forward a cover letter and resume to: [email protected] or fax them to (407) 331-3030.

“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 © 2023 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

11th Circuit Court of Appeals Rejects Florida Eye Doctor’s Request for New Medicare Fraud Trial

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

On July 31, 2020, a panel of U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal judges upheld a 17-year prison sentence for a Florida ophthalmologist found guilty of Medicare fraud. The three-judge panel rejected an appeal in which Salomon Melgen claimed prosecutors mishandled his 2017 criminal trial.

It upheld the conviction on all 67 counts, deemed the 17-year-sentence to be even-handed, and denied him a new trial.

Details of the Case and Why the Former Ophthalmologist Requested a New Trial.

To understand how the panel reached their decision, it helps to understand the details of the scheme and the accusations. Back in April 2017, a jury in the Southern District of Florida convicted Melgen of carrying out systemic billing fraud at his South Florida medical offices. He stood accused of routinely administering unnecessary, invasive treatments and profiteering off the macular-degeneration drug Lucentis.

Additionally, he was charged with running millions of dollars’ worth of unnecessary diagnostic tests, often using outdated technology that allowed him to bill at higher rates.

According to the opinion, Melgen presented a list of perceived reasons for reversal, including the sufficiency of the evidence and reasonableness of his sentence. He argued that charts comparing his billing rates to his peers were not covered by Federal Rule of Evidence 1006 and, therefore, amounted to inadmissible hearsay in violation of the Confrontation Clause of the U.S. Constitution. To learn more, click here to view his appeal.

Unfortunately for the doctor, the alleged errors in the trial did not persuade the judges.

Other Alleged Errors and How the 11th Circuit Judges Came to Their Decision.

One issue was whether any of the witnesses’ communications with others had tainted their testimony at the trial. In the opinion, the appellate panel stated that Melgen failed to show that the witness interactions affected testimony. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by continuing the trial after the witness intimidation came to light. Lastly, the sentence length the district court imposed was “more than reasonable,” the panel stated.

U.S. Circuit Judge Britt C. Grant, said on behalf of the panel, “The scope of the scheme was easily enough for the jury to conclude that Melgen had engaged in systematic fraud, rather than committing isolated mistakes. We find the evidence sufficient to uphold the jury’s verdict.” You can read the opinion in full here.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Investigations of Optometrists and Ophthalmologists.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to optometrists, ophthalmologists and other health providers in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigations, FBI investigations, Medicare investigations, Medicaid 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:

Kapnick, Izzie. “11th Circuit Upholds Doctor’s Massive Fraud Conviction.” Courthouse News. (July 31, 2020). Web.

Jarvis, Sarah. “11th Circ. Won’t Grant Menendez-Linked Doc New Fraud Trial.” Law360. (July 31, 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 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 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 |2024-03-14T09:59:42-04:00April 17, 2021|Categories: Nursing Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |Comments Off on 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Rejects Florida Eye Doctor’s Request for New Medicare Fraud Trial

Doctors & Nurses: Follow These 30 Tips for Professional Correspondence

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

I review many letters, e-mails, memoranda, and other types of correspondence prepared by my physician and nurse clients during my legal representation. These come to me often because of a dispute with a hospital, their peers, an insurance company, a lawsuit filed by a patient, a complaint being investigated by the licensing agency, an investigation of an incident, or another serious matter.

In many cases, way too many cases, such correspondence is unprofessional and defeats the purpose of the reason you are sending the correspondence.  Sometimes the “letter” is so bad, it will be disregarded by the reader to whom it was directed.  I have seen this from doctors, nurses, dentists, psychologists, owners of health care businesses, and many, many other highly educated professionals who really should know better.

When I receive a “letter” that has no return address on it, no date on it, is not addressed to a person or organization, has typographical errors and misspellings, does not have paragraphing, or which is not signed, I cringe.

When such documents are dictated and transcribed by a professional medical transcriptionist, they are usually properly formatted and many of the errors I note below are avoided.  However, when the health professional types (or word-processes) his or her own document or, worse yet, hand writes it, this is when I see the most errors.

To avoid these errors that make your correspondence and written communications look unprofessional, follow these tips.


Remember Why You Are Writing.

Remember, the basic purpose of your correspondence is to communicate ideas effectively. In many cases, it will be to invoke your legal rights in certain situations (such as an appeal or a hearing request). Sometimes, it will attempt to persuade your hospital, peers, or employer to take a certain action or refrain from a certain action. Remember that your correspondence is often the first impression that the other side will have of you. Do you want it to be an impression that you are sloppy, lazy, unprofessional, not knowledgeable, uneducated, or confused?

Whether you are communicating in a letter or via e-mail, these rules still hold true.  In many (if not all) situations involving legal proceedings or legal issues, it is probably best to communicate via a letter sent by U.S. mail or some other reliable delivery service (e.g., Federal Express, Airborne Express, DHL, etc.).  Even if you are transmitting your information via an e-mail, it is my suggestion to prepare it in the form of a paper letter (if your e-mail is not set up to insert your letterhead and signature block automatically) and then scan it in and send it electronically.

I discourage legal communications via e-mail in serious matters because e-mails are often difficult to obtain, isolate, and authenticate when you need them for hearings.  Additionally, they are rarely secure, often available to many others who shouldn’t see them, and easily susceptible to being accidentally sent to others who should not see them at all.

Horror Stories of Unprofessional Correspondence.

Why do I feel this article is necessary?  Because of all the truly horrible correspondence I have seen written by allegedly highly educated professionals, mostly physicians and nurses.  That’s why!

True “Horror Stories” About Unprofessional Correspondence.

Here are just a few examples of true “horror stories” regarding unprofessional correspondence:

The physician never wrote a separate response to any charges or allegations made against him after receiving letters from the Medical Staff advising him he was under investigation.  He would just handwrite (scribble, actually) his remarks on the bottoms and in the margins of whatever document was sent to him and then send it back.

A nurse practitioner was required to respond to serious negligence charges, resulting in an adverse outcome to a patient. On unlined paper, she hand wrote a response letter that was not addressed to anyone, not dated, not signed, and did not state who was sending it. There was no name or signature on it.

A physician was required to provide his analysis of a patient’s case for peer review purposes within the hospital.  His typed letter of three full pages, single-spaced, contained one long paragraph.  I used to work for a Medical Corps Admiral when I was a Navy JAG Corps officer.  The Admiral, a very educated and proper professional, would just glance at such correspondence and state:  “I can tell this doctor doesn’t have any idea what he is talking about.”  Failing to follow good correspondence procedures will show others your thoughts lack organization and cohesion.  A document that lacks organization reflects a mind that lacks organization.

A health professional was required to complete an application for clinical privileges.  He wrote all of the answers by hand, not even staying within the lines on the form, writing over the questions printed on the form and around in the margins of the application.  This is what he signed and turned in to the credentials committee at the hospital.  Believe me, this did not look very professional.

A physician was requested to respond to a medical staff inquiry from the hospital.  Her response came back typed (actually word-processed) in a type font that was 22 characters per inch (cpi), almost too small to read.  Perhaps she was just trying to save a sheet of paper.  But many of us would have had to pull out a magnifying glass or put on reading glasses in order to be able to read it.  Once it is scanned or faxed and then photocopies or re-scanned and re-faxed several times, it will be completely illegible.  If you are actually trying to communicate your ideas, make your correspondence easier to read, not harder to read.  This is my cardinal rule.

A dentist was notified of a pending complaint investigation being opened against her dental license.  She wrote her response to the charges back to the investigator, without using any business address or title, and began her response statement “Dear Sharon,”.  Do not treat others informally, especially in professional or formal situations.  You will be deemed to be unprofessional when you do so.  The investigator is not your friend, your sister, or your mommy.  Do not address her by her first name. Do not end the salutation with a comma, like you would a love letter.  End it with a colon like you would a professional business letter.


30 Tips for Good Professional Correspondence.

Here are some pointers on professional communications that should be followed in all of your professional written communications about business, professional or legal matters, even in e-mails. Please note, the terms below in quotation marks have certain defined meanings.  If you don’t know what these terms mean, look them up.

1.  Always remember that the reason you are sending the correspondence is to attempt to effectively and accurately communicate your position and ideas.  If you are trying to make your message indecipherable or difficult to understand, ignore these tips.  If you are trying to come across as someone who doesn’t give a damn about how he or she is perceived, ignore these tips.  If you want to come across as unprofessional, ignore these tips.

2.  Make sure you include your complete and correct “return address” and contact information, if you are not using your own letterhead.  This includes your physical or mailing address, telephone number, telefax number and e-mail address, so that the other party knows exactly how to reach you.  In cases where you already have this on your letterhead, be sure to use your letterhead (but only your own).  Also, it appears more professional to create a letterhead with the information in it and to use your new letterhead instead of having a professional business letter with a typed “return address.”  However, a typed “return address” is better than none.

3.  Don’t use someone else’s letterhead.  Don’t use your hospital, medical group or institutional letterhead for your own personal communications, unless you are the owner.  Use your personal letterhead (see above), instead.  If you are being accused of poor utilization review, unprofessional conduct, or personal use of hospital (or company) property, then using someone else’s letterhead just helps prove the charge against you.

4.  Date your correspondence.  Date your correspondence.  Date your correspondence.  Nothing shows a lack of professionalism and lack of attention to detail as sharply as undated correspondence.  It will certainly be difficult to prove when your letter or document was sent if you do not have a date on it.  A year or two later, it may be completely impossible to do so.  In case I forgot to mention it, be sure to date your correspondence.

5.  Use titles or honorifics.  In the “business address” of your correspondence, always use the complete name of the person to whom you are writing (if known) together with that person’s honorific or professional title (e.g., Mr., Ms., Dr., Nurse, Prof., Dean, etc.)  This shows both respect and professionalism.

6.  Always use the complete mailing address, including title, of the person to whom you are sending the letter.  In the business address of your correspondence include not only the person’s name and honorifics, but title or position and division within the institution or organization to which you are sending it.  In the case of large organizations, you should include the building and suite or room numbers and any internal routing codes, designations, “mail stops” or other organizational routing codes, that the agency or business you are writing requires to route its mail internally.  Large organizations, especially government agencies and insurance companies, all have large mail rooms which sort and route all mail the organization receives from any source.  Correct internal routing codes will help ensure that your correspondence gets to the correct person or official in a timely manner.  Often today companies scan or have all e-mails saved by a clerk, as well

7.  Always use a salutation.  This is self-explanatory, but see below.

8.  In your “salutation,” always use the person’s last name with a title or honorific.  It is customary to use the term “Dear” in a salutation in formal writing, so this is permitted.  But you may leave it out.  For example, “Dear Secretary Jones:” or “Secretary Jones:” or “Dear Dr. Johnson:” or “Dr. Johnson:”;  all of these are correct.  Never refer to the person by that person’s first name in any type of formal correspondence or correspondence that anyone else might read.  Never say:  “Dear Sue:” or “Sharon:”.  Even if you know these people well enough to call them by their first names, don’t do it in this situation;  it’s unprofessional and may be interpreted as “talking down” to the person.

9.  Always end your “salutation” with a colon, not a comma.  A comma is only used in informal communications to those you know well or socially, such as a letter to your mother or a note to your girlfriend.  Unless this is your mother or your girlfriend to whom you are writing, use a colon.  For example, “Dear Secretary Jones,” or “Dear Sue,” is incorrect.  “Dear Secretary Jones:” or “Ms. Smith:” is correct.

10.  Type (or word-process) your correspondence or have it typed (or word-processed) for you;  this is one reason transcriptionists, secretaries and clerks have jobs.  Do not send handwritten letters in formal or professional matters.  Do not write on the other person’s correspondence or documents and send them back.  Prepare and send a professional looking letter or e-mail, even if you must pay someone to type it for you (and if you are sending an e-mail, I know you can type a little bit yourself, anyway).  To do otherwise is to show laziness, disrespect and unprofessionalism.

11.  Always use a type font in your correspondence (including e-mails) of at least 12 points (10 characters per inch).  Do not use a small, difficult to read type fonts, for example, the size of the type font that most e-mail software defaults to.  Smaller type fonts than 12 points become difficult to read, especially if scanned/rescanned, faxed/refaxed or copied/recopied.  Change the default font in your e-mail software or computer word processing software, if necessary.  You can do this, regardless of how difficult it may seem at first;  I know you can do it, because I can do it.  Make your professional correspondence easier to read, not more difficult to read.

12.  Never use unprofessional looking type fonts for your communications.  Stay away from script type fonts, italics or novelty type fonts.  These are notoriously more difficult to read and look unprofessional.  You are not publishing a flyer for a high school bake sale.  Times New Roman, CG Times, and similar type fonts are more professional looking and easier for a person to read.  Use Courier or Letter Gothic type fonts if necessary.

13.  Keep the correspondence to which you are responding unmarked.  One reason to not write on or mark up the other person’s documents or correspondence is that you may need them as evidence in a court of law or a hearing some day.  Nothing looks less professional than a document you are trying to use as evidence when a different person has made handwritten marks all over it.  The impression is similar to one in which a child with a box of crayons has gotten to it.  You don’t want this or need this.  Show respect and self-control.  Keep the other side’s documents pristine.  They will look much better that way as your “Exhibit 1” in the court hearing.

14.  Use a good concise, descriptive reference line or subject line (often called the “re:” line).  Make it a very brief summary.  State what the content of your letter is actually about.  State if you are responding to a letter or document that you received from the “addressee” (the person to whom you are addressing your correspondence) of your letter.

15.  Include the recipient’s routing information.  If the intended receiver of your letter or correspondence (the “addressee”) included reference numbers, file numbers, account numbers, case name and numbers, a policy number, an investigation number, a routing number, or other similar information on its letter to you, repeat these back in the reference line of your correspondence.  This will help make sure that your correspondence gets routed to the correct file and recipient more timely.  This is especially crucial in large organizations and government agencies.

16.  The contents of the body of your correspondence should be easy to read and easy to understand.  To this end, be sure to use short sentences and short paragraphs.  Each paragraph should convey one idea.  Use headers and section titles, if necessary, to organize your correspondence, especially if it is lengthy.  Remember, headings within your letter that help to organize it are like street signs in a busy city.  They will really help any subsequent reader (and this may be a judge, a jury or a Board of Mediciney) to navigate his, her or its way through your letter.

17.  Be sure to skip a line between each paragraph and, preferably, indent the first line of each paragraph.  [Note:  Some writers will tell you not to indent the first line of each paragraph in professional correspondence;  however, I feel that this makes the correspondence more difficult to read, so I encourage indenting or tabbing in on the first line of each paragraph.]  This makes it easier on the reader and more likely that your ideas will not get lost in a crowd of words.

18.  Keep your paragraphs short and to the point.  Nothing turns readers off as much as a single lengthy paragraph written from margin to margin taking up the whole page.  I suppose some people may have never been taught what paragraphs are.  However, I am willing to bet that most were.  These rare used even in foreign countries.

19.  In longer correspondence, use section headings (in bold or underlined) or headings for each issue, to better organize it.  Think of these as road signs on a long road.  They help the reader to know where he or she is at any given time, and where he or she is going.

20.  When using headers, skip two lines before the header and one line after the header. This helps to set off the new section and header and show a definite division.

21.  Keep your language objective and professional.  Do not ever use profanity [Oops, I just went back and removed the word “damn” I used above.]  Do not ever use any comments even remotely resembling racism, sexism, or antisemitism or prejudice.  Do not be sarcastic.

22.  Be direct and concise in your language.  To the greatest extent possible, use the same terminology and wording that the other party uses, or has used, or the wording used in whatever statutes, regulations, policies, procedures, instructions, or governing documents with which you are dealing (but also, be sure you know what the words and terms mean).

23.  If you intend to request a formal hearing say “I request a formal hearing.”  If you want a full refund, state:  “I request a full refund.”  If you want to appeal the decision, state:  “I want to appeal the decision.”  Don’t be wishy-washy or vague.  For example, don’t say, “I am looking for an attorney to file an appeal for me,” when what you mean to say is “I appeal the decision” or “I request an appeal.”  Say precisely what you want.  Don’t be vague or leave the reader guessing.

24.  If there are any deadlines by which you must respond, be aware of these and make sure your response is received by that date.  Remember “received” means “actually received” by the correct person (or office) at the correct address.  It does not mean “mailed by” or “postmarked by.”  If you have correspondence or a document to which a response must be received by a ceratin date, you need to make sure it is actually in the receiving person’s hands by that date, even if you must hand carry it to that person.  I will usually send important documents by two different methods, in case the mail man dies, the courier service’s plan crashes or the e-mail server goes down.

25.  In closing your correspondence conclude by stating what action is next, whether this is action you intend to take, or action you are requesting the other party to take.  For example:  “I expect to hear from you within ten days as to whether you grant my request or not.”  “Please contact me with hearing dates within the next fourteen days.”  “I will forward you a refund within five days.”  “I will send you my records within five days.”

26.  Always advise the other party of exactly how they should contact you;  provide multiple means of contacting you.  If you are very busy or have an assistant who is authorized to act for you, provide that person’s name and contact information to use as an alternate, as well.  Then be available to receive the return communication(s).  Don’t give telephone numbers you never answer.  Don’t provide an incorrect address (e-mail or physical).

27.  In dealing with dates and deadlines, remember that ten days is ten days;  fourteen days is fourteen days, twenty-one days is twenty-one days.  Made up rules such as “weekends and holidays don’t count” are just that, made up (outside of formal court proceedings).  If the other party has given you “fourteen days to respond,” this means fourteen days from the date on the letter, unless specifically stated otherwise.  Fourteen days means fourteen days, unless it is specifically stated otherwise (e.g., “you have fourteen business days to reply”).

28.  Include a professional closing above your signature.  This should be “Sincerely,” “Sincerely yours,” “Respectfully,” “Respectfully submitted,” or some other professional closing.  Do not conclude with “Love,” or “Very truly yours,” despite the tradition.

29.  In your signature block, include your full typed name, with credentials and title or position listed.  For example, your full name, followed by your degree and other credentials (e.g.,  “John J. Smith, M.D., F.A.A.C.P.”) should be on the line immediately below where you sign.  Next should be listed your position within your organization (if applicable) (e.g., “Chair, Pediatrics Department”).

30.  If you have enclosures, list them at the end of the correspondence, giving a brief or shortened description and numbering them (this is slightly different from military correspondence).  List and number them in the order you discuss them in your correspondence.  Be sure they are properly organized, labeled and divided, especially if any are lengthy.

Following these simple rules, most people learn in middle school will help to keep your correspondence professional looking and in conformity with what most professionals see on a daily basis.  If your correspondence is professional-looking, people will be more likely to think you are a professional and to treat you professionally.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Healthcare Professionals.

The Health Law Firm’s attorneys routinely provide legal representation to nurses, physicians, medical groups, pharmacistspharmaciesphysicians, and other health providers. We provide legal representation for employers in EEOC complaints, workplace discrimination complaints, and suits involving harassment or discrimination complaints.  We also provide legal representation in  Department of Health, Board of Medicine, Board of Nursing investigations and complaints, DORA investigations and complaints.  We provide litigation services in state and federal courts and state and federal administrative hearings.  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 (888) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.


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 the Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com  The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Avenue, Suite 1000, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620 or Toll-Free: (888) 331-6620.

KeyWords:  representation for Professional correspondence, The Health Law Firm, legal representation for health care physicians, health care professional representation, defense lawyer for health care professionals, reviews of The Health Law Firm, tips for professional correspondence, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, representation for professional letters, healthcare professional letter representation, representation for correspondence for doctors and nurses, professional correspondence for legal dispute, Florida health law attorney, legal representation for nurses, nurse defense lawyer, physician 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 © 2021 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

11th Circuit Court of Appeals Rejects Florida Eye Doctor’s Request for New Medicare Fraud Trial

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

On July 31, 2020, a panel of U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal judges upheld a 17-year prison sentence for a Florida ophthalmologist found guilty of Medicare fraud. The three-judge panel rejected an appeal in which Salomon Melgen claimed prosecutors mishandled his 2017 criminal trial.

It upheld the conviction on all 67 counts, deemed the 17-year-sentence to be even-handed, and denied him a new trial.

Details of the Case and Why the Former Ophthalmologist Requested a New Trial.

To understand how the panel reached their decision, it helps to understand the details of the scheme and the accusations. Back in April 2017, a jury in the Southern District of Florida convicted Melgen of carrying out systemic billing fraud at his South Florida medical offices. He stood accused of routinely administering unnecessary, invasive treatments and profiteering off the macular-degeneration drug Lucentis.

Additionally, he was charged with running millions of dollars’ worth of unnecessary diagnostic tests, often using outdated technology that allowed him to bill at higher rates.

According to the opinion, Melgen presented a list of perceived reasons for reversal, including the sufficiency of the evidence and reasonableness of his sentence. He argued that charts comparing his billing rates to his peers were not covered by Federal Rule of Evidence 1006 and, therefore, amounted to inadmissible hearsay in violation of the Confrontation Clause of the U.S. Constitution. To learn more, click here to view his appeal.

Unfortunately for the doctor, the alleged errors in the trial did not persuade the judges.

Other Alleged Errors and How the 11th Circuit Judges Came to Their Decision.

One issue was whether any of the witnesses’ communications with others had tainted their testimony at the trial. In the opinion, the appellate panel stated that Melgen failed to show that the witness interactions affected testimony. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by continuing the trial after the witness intimidation came to light. Lastly, the sentence length the district court imposed was “more than reasonable,” the panel stated.

U.S. Circuit Judge Britt C. Grant, said on behalf of the panel, “The scope of the scheme was easily enough for the jury to conclude that Melgen had engaged in systematic fraud, rather than committing isolated mistakes. We find the evidence sufficient to uphold the jury’s verdict.” You can read the opinion in full here.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Investigations of Optometrists and Ophthalmologists.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to optometrists, ophthalmologists and other health providers in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigations, FBI investigations, Medicare investigations, Medicaid 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:

Kapnick, Izzie. “11th Circuit Upholds Doctor’s Massive Fraud Conviction.” Courthouse News. (July 31, 2020). Web.

Jarvis, Sarah. “11th Circ. Won’t Grant Menendez-Linked Doc New Fraud Trial.” Law360. (July 31, 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 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 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 |2024-03-14T09:59:46-04:00March 17, 2021|Categories: Medical Education Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |Comments Off on 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Rejects Florida Eye Doctor’s Request for New Medicare Fraud Trial

10 Biggest Mistakes Dentists Make That Cause DOH Complaints

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

In representing dentists in complaints against their licenses, we see similar cases over and over again. The dentists could have avoided many Department of Health (DOH) complaints that may wind up before the Board of Dentistry.

These are the ten biggest mistakes we see dentists make, leading to DOH complaints being filed and investigations being opened against them.

1.  Requiring patients to pay an outstanding dental bill before releasing a copy of their dental records. This is prohibited by law. However, the patient can be charged for the copy of the record, up to $1.00 per page for the first 25 pages, ($.25 per page after that), and actual costs of reproduction for other forms of dental records (X-rays, CD’s photographs).

2.  Not having the original patient x-rays or a good digitized copy. Believe it or not, many dentists we have represented either gave their x-rays to the patient or sent them to a subsequent treating dentist. Always release copies (for which you may charge). Always keep the originals. (Not having them when needed). With the expanding use of digital x-rays stored in an electronic dental record, this is not so problematic as it was in the past.

3.  Accepting a new patient who has had more than one other primary dentist within the prior five years (when the patient hasn’t relocated to a new geographical area). Unhappy, disgruntled, unrealistic patients will change dentists often. Identify these patients early and refuse to accept them as your patients or terminate them as patients as soon as you identify them. Closely related to this is accepting or failing to terminate the “disgruntled” patient. If a patient is a chronic complainer or threatens to sue or file a complaint, this is a patient who will, most likely, never be satisfied. Terminate this patient immediately.

4.  Failing to fully inform the patient of possible less-than-desirable outcomes (documenting this in writing, preferably signed by the patient). This includes but is not limited to the fact that there may be subsequent pain or infection, that the bite may be less than perfect and may have to be adjusted, that a bridge or other fixture may not fit correctly and may need to be adjusted, etc.

5.  Failing to have and use appropriate consent forms including, but not limited to:

a.  Refusal of a treatment consent form

b.  Consent for less than optimal dental treatment (to use when a patient refuses to follow dentist’s recommended treatment plan). This is also called “Refusal of Recommended Treatment.”

c.  Root Canal consent form
d.  Tooth Extraction
e.  Endodontic procedures
f.  Dentures and bridges

6.  Failing to refund dental fees when complaining patients demand it. We do not routinely recommend that you refund dental fees based solely on a patient’s demand that you do so. In many cases, the patient will have benefited from the treatment, procedure, or appliance, and should pay for it. However, in many instances, this must be a business decision based on risk management principles. It is always a good idea to weigh the amount in attorney’s fees, time, and aggravation, mental anguish, or increase in insurance premiums that will result if you fail to refund demanded fees. Base your decision on a calculation of how likely it is that a complaint will result.

7.  Failing to have good, legible, comprehensive treatment records on the patient. A documented, comprehensive written treatment plan signed by the patient is mandatory in all cases except emergency cases and specialty consults. This also includes failing to prepare and maintain a periodontal chart on a patient. If you are going to treat and follow a patient for more than an emergency visit or a specialty consultation, you should perform a periodontal exam. Just as important, the Board of Dentistry will expect you to chart this on a periodontal chart.

8.  Failing to document the type of and amount of a drug administered, a sedative used, a compound used, etc. Be sure this is accurately stated in your chart. Be sure this is accurately billed with the correct billing code.

9.  Failing to give patients a copy of their dental chart within a reasonable period of time after requested. (The courts usually define “reasonable” as 14 calendar days or ten business days; however, the Board of Dentistry allows up to 30 days. If you can reasonably provide it earlier, do so, documenting the date.

10.  Producing only part of the complete dental chart to the patient, subsequent treating dentist, or DOH investigator when requested. This has become more problematic as dentists’ convert more and more into electronic dental records. Be sure to print out and produce all treatment plans, histories, physical exams, family history questionnaires, medical history questionnaires, informed consent forms, photographs, treatment plans, x-rays, periodontal charts, progress notes, daily journal entires, bills, correspondence with health insurers or other third-party payers. Also included are prior dentists’ records received, operative reports, or any other documents you have relating to the patient’s treatment.

These are not hard and fast rules. We cannot assure you that you will never receive a DOH complaint, a patient complaint, a grievance, or a lawsuit if you follow them. However, if you follow them, you will probably find your patients happier, your practice calmer and more productive, and your risks of having a complaint filed significantly reduced or eliminated.

Click here to read one of my prior blogs about DOH complaints and investigations.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Investigations of Dentists and Health Professionals Today.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to dentists, dental hygienists, physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, CRNAs, pharmacists, psychologists and other health providers in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigations, FBI investigations, Medicare investigations, Medicaid 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.

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 or toll-free: (888) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Legal representation for Department of Health (DOH) investigations, legal representation for DOH complaints, licensure defense attorney, DOH defense attorney, representation for DOH cases, DOH complaint representation, representation for dentists, dental law defense attorney, dentist representation, health law defense attorney, legal representation for health care professionals, legal representation for disciplinary actions against your license, legal representation for license revocation, licensure defense attorney, administrative complaint attorney, legal representation for administrative complaints, legal counsel for Board representation, Board of Dentistry representation, Board of Dentistry defense lawyer, The Health Law Firm, health law defense attorney, Florida health law attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorneys review

“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 © 2021 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

New Changes to HHS Regulatory Process: Secretary Must Sign All Agency Rulemaking

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

In a September 15, 2020 memorandum, the current Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Alex Azar, barred the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other federal health agencies under his authority from independently enacting any new federal regulations. The memo establishes that the Secretary must sign all agency rulemaking. This new policy affects all rules coming from all HHS agencies and offices, the department said, including the FDA, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), and Office for Civil Rights. It doesn’t apply to guidance documents, emergency use authorizations, or vaccine or drug approvals.

How long this policy stands after President-elect Biden is sworn in is anybody’s guess. It is my guess that it won’t last long.

Why Make the Changes?

According to HHS, the new regulation-making procedures are to ensure consistency within HHS, compliance with congressional intent, the need to minimize the risk of litigation, and to provide public accountability. HHS regulations have been challenged in court based on the argument that officials who signed new regulations did not have the proper authority to do so.

The memo attempts to rationalize the change in the face of critics who claim that the move could negatively affect public trust in approval of COVID-19 vaccines and the entire approval process.

Rulemaking Process Before and After the Memo.

Before the policy change, the law and established departmental procedure required that all new regulations go through departmental and White House clearance and receive the Secretary’s approval. The regulations were typically signed by the Secretary and by the head of the agency involved. In some instances, other officials to whom authority had been delegated signed the new regulations.

Now, all HHS regulations will still go through departmental and White House clearance and will continue to be approved by the Secretary. But, the change effectively bars the FDA and other health agencies from signing off on any new regulations regarding the nation’s food, medicine, and other products under the HHS umbrella. The HHS Secretary himself must now sign all final regulations.

HHS released the following statement on this action:

“Before and after this action, no regulation issues from any part of HHS without the approval of the Secretary and the White House. The only change made by this memo is that, instead of the Secretary’s just approving all agency regulations, each regulation now also will be formally signed by him.”

Click here to read the HHS Statement on Regulatory Process.

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

Sources:

Stein, Shira. “HHS Secretary to Sign All Rules in Bid to Stem Litigation.” Bloomberg Law. (September 21, 2020). Web.

Keller and Heckman LLP. “A New Policy by HHS Secretary Alex Azar Will Prevent FDA and Other Health Agencies From Signing Final Rules.” National Law Review. (September 21, 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.

 

“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.

10 Biggest Mistakes Dentists Make That Cause DOH Complaints

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

In representing dentists in complaints against their licenses, we see similar cases over and over again. The dentists could have avoided many Department of Health (DOH) complaints that may wind up before the Board of Dentistry.

These are the ten biggest mistakes we see dentists make, leading to DOH complaints being filed and investigations being opened against them.

1.  Requiring patients to pay an outstanding dental bill before releasing a copy of their dental records. This is prohibited by law. However, the patient can be charged for the copy of the record, up to $1.00 per page for the first 25 pages, ($.25 per page after that), and actual costs of reproduction for other forms of dental records (X-rays, CD’s photographs).

2.  Not having the original patient x-rays or a good digitized copy. Believe it or not, many dentists we have represented either gave their x-rays to the patient or sent them to a subsequent treating dentist. Always release copies (for which you may charge). Always keep the originals. (Not having them when needed). With the expanding use of digital x-rays stored in an electronic dental record, this is not so problematic as it was in the past.

3.  Accepting a new patient who has had more than one other primary dentist within the prior five years (when the patient hasn’t relocated to a new geographical area). Unhappy, disgruntled, unrealistic patients will change dentists often. Identify these patients early and refuse to accept them as your patients or terminate them as patients as soon as you identify them. Closely related to this is accepting or failing to terminate the “disgruntled” patient. If a patient is a chronic complainer or threatens to sue or file a complaint, this is a patient who will, most likely, never be satisfied. Terminate this patient immediately.

4.  Failing to fully inform the patient of possible less-than-desirable outcomes (documenting this in writing, preferably signed by the patient). This includes but is not limited to the fact that there may be subsequent pain or infection, that the bite may be less than perfect and may have to be adjusted, that a bridge or other fixture may not fit correctly and may need to be adjusted, etc.

5.  Failing to have and use appropriate consent forms including, but not limited to:

a.  Refusal of a treatment consent form

b.  Consent for less than optimal dental treatment (to use when a patient refuses to follow dentist’s recommended treatment plan). This is also called “Refusal of Recommended Treatment.”

c.  Root Canal consent form
d.  Tooth Extraction
e.  Endodontic procedures
f.  Dentures and bridges

6.  Failing to refund dental fees when complaining patients demand it. We do not routinely recommend that you refund dental fees based solely on a patient’s demand that you do so. In many cases, the patient will have benefited from the treatment, procedure, or appliance, and should pay for it. However, in many instances, this must be a business decision based on risk management principles. It is always a good idea to weigh the amount in attorney’s fees, time, and aggravation, mental anguish, or increase in insurance premiums that will result if you fail to refund demanded fees. Base your decision on a calculation of how likely it is that a complaint will result.

7.  Failing to have good, legible, comprehensive treatment records on the patient. A documented, comprehensive written treatment plan signed by the patient is mandatory in all cases except emergency cases and specialty consults. This also includes failing to prepare and maintain a periodontal chart on a patient. If you are going to treat and follow a patient for more than an emergency visit or a specialty consultation, you should perform a periodontal exam. Just as important, the Board of Dentistry will expect you to chart this on a periodontal chart.

8.  Failing to document the type of and amount of a drug administered, a sedative used, a compound used, etc. Be sure this is accurately stated in your chart. Be sure this is accurately billed with the correct billing code.

9.  Failing to give patients a copy of their dental chart within a reasonable period of time after requested. (The courts usually define “reasonable” as 14 calendar days or ten business days; however, the Board of Dentistry allows up to 30 days. If you can reasonably provide it earlier, do so, documenting the date.

10.  Producing only part of the complete dental chart to the patient, subsequent treating dentist, or DOH investigator when requested. This has become more problematic as dentists’ convert more and more into electronic dental records. Be sure to print out and produce all treatment plans, histories, physical exams, family history questionnaires, medical history questionnaires, informed consent forms, photographs, treatment plans, x-rays, periodontal charts, progress notes, daily journal entires, bills, correspondence with health insurers or other third-party payers. Also included are prior dentists’ records received, operative reports, or any other documents you have relating to the patient’s treatment.

These are not hard and fast rules. We cannot assure you that you will never receive a DOH complaint, a patient complaint, a grievance, or a lawsuit if you follow them. However, if you follow them, you will probably find your patients happier, your practice calmer and more productive, and your risks of having a complaint filed significantly reduced or eliminated.

Click here to read one of my prior blogs about DOH complaints and investigations.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Investigations of Dentists and Health Professionals Today.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to dentists, dental hygienists, physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, CRNAs, pharmacists, psychologists and other health providers in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigations, FBI investigations, Medicare investigations, Medicaid 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.

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 or toll-free: (888) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Legal representation for Department of Health (DOH) investigations, legal representation for DOH complaints, licensure defense attorney, DOH defense attorney, representation for DOH cases, DOH complaint representation, representation for dentists, dental law defense attorney, dentist representation, health law defense attorney, legal representation for health care professionals, legal representation for disciplinary actions against your license, legal representation for license revocation, licensure defense attorney, administrative complaint attorney, legal representation for administrative complaints, legal counsel for Board representation, Board of Dentistry representation, Board of Dentistry defense lawyer, The Health Law Firm, health law defense attorney, Florida health law attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorneys review

“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 © 2021 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

Go to Top