9th Circuit Court Rules Former Nurse Can Proceed With Med Mal Suit Against VA Hospital

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

On September 29, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a former federal employee can sue the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). The suit alleges medical negligence that occurred during psychiatric treatment for a non-workplace-related injury.

As a result, the three-judge panel of the appeals court said that U.S. Navy veteran and VA nurse S.H.s’ lawsuit against a Seattle VA hospital can proceed. (Please note: we are not providing the nurse’s name out of respect for her privacy.)

In 2019, the district court dismissed S.H.’s federal tort lawsuit because the alleged malpractice occurred when doctors were treating an injury she said she sustained at her workplace. The district court reasoned that all existing or exacerbated injuries stemming from a federal workplace injury must be dealt with through the Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA), even malpractice claims.

Click here to view the district court’s order for the motion to dismiss in full.


Background Details.

The plaintiff in the suit is a veteran of the U.S. Navy who suffered a mental breakdown at work in October 2011. She sought follow-up psychiatric care at a VA hospital, where she allegedly received negligent treatment. At the time the treatment was sought, she was an employee of the federal government. She claimed years of workplace bullying and harassment by her supervisor caused her mental breakdown. She sued in 2016.

The FTCA authorizes plaintiffs to sue the U.S. for “personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment, under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred.” 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)(1). Any individual employee of the government acting within the course and scope of her job duties is immune from liability; the United States is substituted for that person in the suit.


The Big Question: Does the FTCA Authorize Suit by a Plaintiff in This Set of Circumstances?

Two factors complicate the answer in this case. First, when the plaintiff sought treatment, she was an employee of the federal government, working as a registered nurse at the VA hospital. Second, she claimed that her mental breakdown, the event that prompted her to seek medical care, was caused by workplace bullying and harassment at the hands of her supervisor. Hence, this would qualify as a work-related injury.

These facts bring into play another federal statute: the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act. FECA establishes a workers’ compensation blueprint that covers most federal employees. It is similar to state workers’ compensation laws.

When an employee sustains an injury covered by FECA, the remedy is to seek compensation under the act; they may not sue for damages under any other provision of law, including the FTCA. Therefore, had the plaintiff sued the U.S. under the FTCA to recover damages for workplace bullying and harassment, the district court would have been required to dismiss the action as barred by FECA.

In this case, however, the plaintiff is not suing for the injuries caused by the workplace bullying and harassment. Instead, she is seeking to recover damages for the alleged medical malpractice by the individual doctors treating her.

Based on these facts, the appellate court reversed the district court’s judgment against the plaintiff in her Federal Tort Claims Act action. It held that the district court erred in dismissing the action on the grounds that it was barred by the FECA.

To view the ninth circuit court’s opinion in full, click here.


Consult a Health Law Attorney Who Is Familiar with Army, Navy, and Air Force Health Care Professionals and Their Problems.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm have represented federal physicians, nurses, dentists, and other health professionals in the Army, Navy, and Air Force, active duty and retired, as well as physicians, nurses, and other health professionals working for the Veterans Administration (VA) in the U.S. and around the world. They represent physicians and other health professionals with the Indian Health Service (IHS) and the Public Health Service (PHS). Representation has included disciplinary action, investigations, peer review investigations, clinical privileges actions, fair hearings, National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) actions, and appeals.

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:

Capriel, Jonathan. “9th Circ. Revives Psychiatric Med Mal Suit Against VA Hospital.” Law360. (September 29, 2021). Web.

Pazanowski, Mary Ann. “Former Federal Nurse Gets New Shot at Injury Suit Against US.” Bloomberg Law. (September 29, 2021). Web.


About the Author:
 Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and former registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456 or Toll-Free: (888) 331-6620. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

“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.

2023-02-04T19:00:33-05:00February 6th, 2023|Categories: Health Facilities Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

Florida Gov Signs Sweeping COVID-19 Liability Protections Into Law

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

On March 29, 2021, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill that protects businesses, governments, and healthcare providers in Florida from COVID-19 lawsuits if they make a reasonable effort to follow guidelines to prevent the spread of coronavirus (whatever that means). Specifically, the measure gives civil immunity to corporations, hospitals, nursing homes, government entities, schools, and churches as long as the alleged negligence doesn’t involve gross negligence or intentional misconduct. The House Passed S.B. 72 on March 26, in an 83-31 vote, and DeSantis signed it the same day he received it from the Legislature.

Why doesn’t this conflict with the Florida Governor’s ban on any mandatory masking, vaccination, or vaccination “passport” requirements? This is very unclear. Perhaps the courts will need to straighten it out.


Details of Senate Bill 72.

The new law establishes significant legal hurdles for individuals who want to sue businesses and health care professionals over coronavirus-related injuries. Plaintiffs who file suit will need to show that the defendant deliberately ignored public health safety guidelines. They will also need a signed affidavit from a doctor stating with reasonable certainty that injury or death caused by COVID-19 was a direct result of the defendant’s actions. Does this sound arbitrary and capricious to anyone other than me?

Now how can a doctor or anyone else make a statement like the one required by the law? How does a doctor know where the patient has been or with whom the patient has been in contact the last fifteen days? How is a physician going to conduct contact tracing and figure out where the patient’s COVID-19 came from? This is very unclear. Perhaps the courts will need to straighten it out.

The law states that it will apply retroactively to the beginning of the pandemic. One must ask if this is an ex post facto law prohibited by the U.S. Constitution (Art. I, § 10, cl. 1.) and the Florida Constitution (Art. 1, § 10)? Additionally, the new law establishes a one-year limitation period to sue from the date of death, hospitalization, or COVID-19 diagnosis that forms the basis of the claim. Boy, this should really throw a big stumbling block in front of any potential plaintiff trying to get into court. (Note: Yes, I know that the federal prohibition on ex post facto laws was held to apply to criminal laws.)

“Over the course of the past year, our state’s businesses, health care providers, and other organizations have been forced to operate in fear of frivolous lawsuits with no merit threatening their livelihoods. As we move forward in our state’s economic recovery, this piece of legislation will provide Floridians with greater peace of mind as they go to work, go to school, and go about their daily lives,” DeSantis said applauding the quick passage of the legislation.

View S.B. 72 here.

To read about a recent case in Florida involving a COVID-19 death lawsuit, click here to read my blog.

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

At the Health Law Firm, we provide legal services for all health care providers and professionals. This includes physicians, nurses, dentists, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, 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. We do NOT represent plaintiffs in COVID-19 injury suits, however.

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:

Hale, Nathan. “Fla. Gov. Signs Sweeping COVID-19 Liability Protection Law.” Law360. (March 29, 2021). Web.

Kang, Y. Peter. “Fla. COVID-19 Biz Liability Shield Bill Sent To Gov.’s Desk.” Law360. (March 26, 2021). Web.

NBC 6 Miami. “Florida Governor Signs COVID-19 Liability Protection Bill.” AP News. (March 29, 2021). Web.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law; he is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Avenue, Suite 1000, Altamonte Springs, Florida 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 © 2021 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Massage Therapists-You MUST Obtain License Complaint Defense Coverage Insurance

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

I am often called on to represent massage therapists accused of sexually molesting a client during the course of the massage or for offering sex to an undercover agent. Most often, this type of case comes to us from a complaint filed with the Department of Health, the umbrella agency over the Board of Massage Therapy. Often the complaint is a made-up one or is based on mistaken identity or an incorrect perception on the part of the customer.

The tragic part of this story is that often, the case could be defended and the charges against the massage therapist dismissed, but the massage therapist does not have the money to retain a good, experienced attorney. As a result, the massage therapist must either give up their license or be found guilty, revoked, lose their board certification, and no longer has a job or profession. It is very inexpensive, often less than $100 per year.

That is why we say that all massage therapists absolutely should purchase professional liability insurance that includes coverage to pay for the legal defense of a complaint filed against the massage therapist’s license. Not all professional liability insurance does provide this type of coverage, so you must check and make sure your does.

Professional Liability Insurance with Professional License Defense Coverage is Cheap–Buy It.

Professional liability insurance with professional license defense coverage is very inexpensive for a massage therapist. It often costs less than $200 per year. When you have it, it will pay for a lawyer to defend you right from the very start, when you first find out there may be a complaint against you, even if no lawsuit is filed.

Yet, so often we see a massage therapist falsely accused of a wrong-doing, laid of from their job, without any money, and therefore unable to hire a lawyer to defend themselves. This type of insurance can be invaluable. It can save your license and your career.

If You Have a Policy, Check it for this Type of Coverage.

Even if you have a professional liability insurance policy, it may not contain this type of coverage. Check your policy. Call or write the company to find out if you are not sure. If it does not have professional license defense coverage, sometimes called “State Licensing Board Complaint Coverage” ask if you can purchase a “rider” to your insurance policy that does provide such coverage, even if no law suit is filed. If your company does not offer such coverage at all, then immediately purchase a different policy with a different company.

Employers: Make Your Employees Purchase Insurance Coverage.

If you employee massage therapists or you own a massage establishment, then you should require your employees to purchase such insurance coverage and have your company or establishment included as a “named insured” on the policy. Again, these policies are very inexpensive for the massage therapist to purchase, so you might even consider paying for such insurance if the employee claims they can’t afford it.

Often when a client or customer is thinking about suing a company or a massage therapist, their attorney will tell them to file a complaint with the licensing board. Then the licensing board will do all the investigating needed on the case and will even hire experts to review the case. Later, if the licensing board rules that the massage therapist (or massage establishment) is at fault, the plaintiff’s attorney can use all of that information in a civil law suit against the massage therapist of the employer.

You can prevent this by ensuring that you have legal defense from day one.

There Is Nothing That Prohibits You from Having Two Policies.

If your present insurance policy does not include professional license defense coverage or if it only includes a small amount ($5,000 or $10,000) consider purchasing an additional policy from a different company.

Companies That Offer Professional License Defense Coverage for Massage Therapists.

Following are the names of the professional liability insurance companies that we have been able to find that offer good professional license defense coverage at a low rate as of January 2023:

1. CPH Insurance–In our opinion, the best coverage that is available. It includes “State Licensing Board Defense Coverage” up to $35,000 for defense of a licensing board complaint. Customers can increase this limit to $75,000 for an additional $75 premium, or to a $100,000 limit for a $100 additional premium (which we recommend doing). See https://www.cphins.com/

2. HPSO (Healthcare Providers Service Organization) Insurance–Great coverage at a low price. See https://www.hpso.com/

3. CM&F Group Insurance. See https://www.cmfgroup.com/contact-us/

4. AMTA (American Massage Therapy Association) Insurance (but may only provide coverage while you remain a member of this organization). See https://www.amtamassage.org/massage-insurance/overview

5. ProLiability Insurance, powered by AMBA (Association Member Benefits Advisors, LLC). See https://www.proliability.com/professional-liability-insurance/

There may be others out there and if you come across one, please let me know. I am always looking to expand my list.

For more information and ways that The Health Law Firm can help in licensure matters, visit our Video Q&A section or visit our website’s Areas of Practice page.

Contact Health Law Attorneys With Experience Handling Licensing Issues.

If you are applying for a massage therapy, dental, or health care license, have had a license suspended or revoked, or are facing imminent action against your license, it is imperative that you contact an experienced healthcare attorney to assist you in defending your career. Remember, your license is your livelihood, it is not recommended that you attempt to pursue these matters without the assistance of an attorney.

The Health Law Firm routinely represents massage therapists, dentists, nurses, physicians, medical groups, clinics, and other healthcare providers in personal and facility licensing issues.

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.

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: PAlexander@TheHealthLawFirm.com 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.

 

 

2023-02-02T11:57:13-05:00February 2nd, 2023|Categories: Massage Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

Feds Charge 25 Individuals in Massive Fake Nursing Diploma Scheme in Florida

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

On January 25, 2023, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) launched a multi-state coordinated law enforcement action to apprehend individuals engaged in a scheme to sell false and fraudulent nursing degree diplomas and transcripts. The enforcement action resulted in the execution of search warrants in Delaware, New York, New Jersey, Texas, and Florida. 25 individuals have been charged in the Southern District of Florida for their alleged participation in a fraud scheme that created an illegal licensing and employment shortcut for aspiring nurses.

The defendants include “owners, operators, and employees” of the schools who “prepared and sold the fake nursing school diplomas and transcripts, knowing that the candidates would use those false documents to sit for nursing board examinations, secure nursing licenses, and ultimately obtain nursing jobs in medical facilities not only in Florida but elsewhere across the country,” officials said. Additional defendants charged include “recruiters” to bring in would-be buyers.

Operation Nightingale.

The scheme sold fake and fraudulent nursing degree diplomas and transcripts obtained from accredited Florida-based nursing schools to aspiring Registered Nurse (RN) and Licensed Practical/Vocational Nurse (LPN/VN) candidates. The nursing schools, Siena College, Palm Beach School of Nursing, and Sacred Heart International Institute, are now closed.

Officials said nursing candidates who allegedly participated in the scheme would pay as much as $15,000 for the fraudulent diplomas.

The individuals who acquired the fraudulent nursing credentials used them to qualify to sit for the national nursing board exam. Upon completing the board exam, the nursing applicants became eligible to obtain licensure in various states to work as an RN or an LPN/VN. Once licensed, the individuals could get employment in the healthcare field. The overall scheme resulted in the distribution of more than 7,600 fake nursing diplomas and transcripts.

Each defendant faces up to 20 years in prison. Learn more about “Operation Nightingale” from the OIG here.

Dangerous Healthcare Licensing and Credentialing Shortcuts.

We expect our healthcare professionals to be who they claim they are. We expect that they’ve had the proper training and credentialing. “Specifically when we talk about a nurse’s education and credentials – shortcut is not a word we want to use,” said U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Markenzy Lapointe. “When we take an injured son or daughter to a hospital emergency room, we don’t expect that the licensed practical nurse or registered nurse training our child took a shortcut.” The scheme enabled these nursing candidates allegedly buying the fake diplomas “to avoid hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of clinical training countless hours getting that experience,” Lapointe said. “These people didn’t go through that. That part was completely skipped.”

This fraud scheme is a public safety concern and tarnishes the reputation of nurses who complete the demanding clinical work required to obtain their professional licenses and employment. Additionally, it can erode public trust in our healthcare system. The alleged selling and purchasing of nursing diplomas and transcripts to willing but unqualified individuals is a serious crime that can endanger the health and safety of patients.

Click here to view the U.S. Department of Justice press release.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Investigations Against Nurses and Nursing Students.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to nurses, nursing students, and ARNPs in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, licensure defense representation, investigation representation, Department of Health investigations, DOJ investigations, Board of Nursing investigations, formal and informal administrative hearings, emergency suspension orders, emergency restriction orders and other types of investigations of health professionals and providers.

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:

Pezenik, Sasha. “Feds announce massive takedown of fraudulent nursing diploma scheme.” ABC News. (January 27, 2023). Web.

D’Angelo, Bob. “Operation Nightingale: 25 charged in fake nursing diploma scheme in Florida.” Cox Media Group. (January 27, 2023). Web.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “2023 Operation Nightingale Enforcement Action.” (January 26, 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: PAlexander@TheHealthLawFirm.com 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.

Texas Hospital’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Upheld by Federal Court

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

As some states lift COVID-19 restrictions, the business community is still grappling with the dynamic between the COVID-19 vaccine and workplace operations. To address this, some U.S. employers have elected to adopt mandatory vaccination policies. These policies, in essence, require that, subject to a few exceptions, all employees must receive the COVID-19 vaccine as a condition of continued employment.

Not surprisingly, we see various legal challenges to mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policies across the country. On June 12, 2021, a federal court in Texas became the first to rule on the permissibility of such policies enforced by private employers. In a landmark ruling, the court stated that mandatory workplace vaccination policies are lawful under Texas and federal law and may be enforced as a condition of continued employment.


The Court’s Ruling on Mandatory Vaccination Policies.

The lawsuit, Bridges v. Houston Methodist Hospital, was initially filed on behalf of 117 employees after their employer, Houston Methodist Hospital, instituted a policy requiring employees to receive a COVID-19 vaccine as a condition of continued employment. Employees who were not vaccinated by the deadline were to be placed on a two-week unpaid suspension to allow them to comply with the policy. Under the policy, those who ultimately did not comply would be terminated.

In the law suit challenging the employer’s policy, the Plaintiffs asserted: (1) the employees whose employment was terminated as a result of this policy were wrongfully terminated in violation of Texas law, and (2) the vaccine mandate violated public policy of the state of Texas.

Texas Wrongful Termination Claim.

Under Texas law, the court found that firing an employee who is unwilling to comply with an employer’s mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy does not constitute wrongful termination. Texas law only protects employees who are fired for refusing to commit an illegal act at the request of their employer. The court reasoned that receiving the vaccine is not an illegal act given the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings upholding involuntary quarantines and mandatory vaccines.

Violation of Public Policy.

The court dismissed the plaintiffs’ public policy arguments because, according to the court, Texas law does not recognize a public policy exception to the at-will employment doctrine. Additionally, the court noted that a mandatory vaccine requirement is consistent with public policy. The Supreme Court has previously held that state-imposed quarantine and vaccination requirements do not violate due process of law.

The court held that the plaintiffs were not being coerced to get the vaccine but were being given a basic choice by its employer: get the vaccine so the hospital could safely continue its business of saving lives or seek employment elsewhere.

Lastly, the court also cited recent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidance in its decision. The guidance states that employers can require employees to be vaccinated, subject to the obligation to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with legitimate medical or religious reasons for not being vaccinated. Click here to view.

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

Important Takeaway From This Court Decision.

While there are sure to be future legal challenges to mandatory workplace vaccination policies, this decision provides strong support for their use and permissibility. However, even with this ruling, employers with policies need to be mindful of their obligations and potentially provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities or sincerely held religious beliefs that prevent them from receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Of course, we will see numerous legal challenges of all kinds to these decisions.

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. We do NOT represent plaintiffs in COVID-19 injury suits, however.

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:

Downie, Alex. “Federal Court Upholds Employer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate.” The National Law Review. (June 15, 2021). Web.

Brown, Amanda, Goldstein, Mark. “In first-of-its-kind decision, federal court rules that mandatory workplace COVID-19 vaccine policies are lawful.” Employment Law Watch. (June 16, 2021). Web.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law; he is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Avenue, Suite 1000, Altamonte Springs, Florida 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 © 2021 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

 

University of Colorado Sued For Denying COVID-19 Vaccine Religious Exemptions

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

On September 29, 2021, a pediatrician and medical student sued the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (CU) for denying COVID vaccine religious exemptions. The U.S. District Court lawsuit argued that school administrators judge the validity of personal religious beliefs in violation of the First Amendment.

Religious Exception For COVID Vaccine.

Both plaintiffs are challenging the denial of their requests for religious exemptions from the school’s COVID vaccination mandate. The lawsuit alleges that the university arbitrarily grants religious exemptions to its vaccine requirement for all staff and students. It also claims that CU is approving requests that are based on organized religious beliefs that oppose vaccinations while subjecting requests based on personal religious beliefs to “intrusive religious inquisition to test the veracity of students’ and employees’ asserted religious beliefs.”

Details of the Denials.

Neither plaintiff is named in the lawsuit ostensibly to protect them from retaliation. Instead, the pediatrician is referred to as “Dr. Jane Doe,” and the first-year medical student as “John Doe.”

According to the complaint, Dr. Jane Doe requested a religious exemption based on her Catholic beliefs and opposition to “abortion-derived cell lines” used in the three available U.S. vaccines. However, she did not oppose other vaccines, such as the flu shot.

Because of this, CU denied her request, stating that campus policy “only recognizes religious exemptions based on a religious belief whose teachings are opposed to all immunizations,” according to the complaint. Jane Doe argues that her pending termination will harm her reputation and stain her record as a licensed medical professional.

According to the complaint, the second plaintiff, John Doe, a first-year medical student, requested a religious exemption citing his Buddhist beliefs and avoidance of “products developed through the killing or harming of animals (including human beings).”

CU officials also denied the exception request, stating that John Doe’s objections to the vaccine “are all of a personal nature and not part of a comprehensive system of religious beliefs.”

The lawsuit says John Doe’s pending termination from CU would bar him from transferring to a different medical school under guidelines issued by the Association of American Medical Colleges and that he would have to reapply to attend a different U.S. medical program.

In response to the lawsuit, a spokesperson for the university said their mandatory vaccine policy “offers the best way to protect” the more than two million patients that the university faculty serve annually.

Both plaintiffs seek approval of their requests for religious exemptions and money for court costs and personal damages. This lawsuit is just one example of the fight over a growing number of COVID vaccine mandates nationwide. As a result, businesses need to be mindful and provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities or religious beliefs that prevent them from receiving the COVID vaccine.

To read about another recent case regarding a hospital’s COVID vaccine mandate, click here to read my prior blog.

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

At the Health Law Firm, we provide legal services for all health care providers and professionals. This includes physicians, nurses, dentists, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, 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, medical groups, institutions, and individual health professionals 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 and DORA investigations. We represent medical students and resident physicians in disputes with their medical education programs. We do NOT represent plaintiffs seeking to avoid vaccinations or in COVID-19 injury suits, however.

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:

Nieberg, Patty. “University of Colorado faces COVID religious exemption suit.” AP News. (September 29, 2021). Web.

“Pediatrician, medical student sue University of Colorado over denial of COVID vaccine religious exemption.” The Colorado Sun. (September 30, 2021). Web.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law; he is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Avenue, Suite 1000, Altamonte Springs, Florida 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 © 2021 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

 

California Dental Practice Pays $23,000 Settlement For Potential HIPAA Privacy Violations Involving Yelp Posts

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

On December 14, 2022, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) settled with New Vision Dental (NVD) over a potential HIPAA Privacy violation. The California-based dental practice paid $23,000 to OCR and agreed to implement a corrective action plan after allegedly including protected health information (PHI) in its responses to reviews on Yelp.

The Complaint and Investigation.

On November 29, 2017, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) received a complaint alleging New Vision Dental had posted responses to several unfavorable reviews by patients on Yelp and frequently disclosed confidential protected health information (PHI) in its responses. For example, in some posts, patients were allegedly identified, and NVD revealed their full names when the patient may have only chosen to use a made-up name on the platform. Other information allegedly posted included detailed information about the patient’s visits, treatment, and health insurance, when that information had not been posted publicly by the patient.

The federal agency’s investigation found potential violations of the HIPAA Privacy Rule, including impermissible uses and disclosures of PHI and failures to provide adequate Notice of Privacy Practices and implement Privacy policies and procedures. “This latest enforcement action demonstrates the importance of following the law even when you are using social media. Providers cannot disclose protected health information of their patients when responding to negative online reviews. This is a clear ‘NO,’” said OCR Director Melanie Fontes Rainer in a statement.

To read more, click here for the press release from the HHS.

In addition to the settlement, NVD agreed to implement a corrective action plan (CAP) that will be monitored for two years by OCR. As part of its CAP, the dental practice agreed to develop, revise, and maintain written policies and procedures to comply with federal privacy and security standards. All workforce members will also receive training on those policies and procedures, and NVD is required to remove all social media postings that include PHI.

The resolution agreement and CAP can be viewed here.

Guidelines for Appropriate use of Social Media and Social Networking.

Healthcare professionals are discouraged from interacting with current or past patients on personal social networking sites and should never, under any circumstances, reveal personal information about the patient or the patient’s treatment or care. Online interaction with patients should only occur when discussing the patient’s medical treatment within the physician-patient relationship and with written, signed consent by the patient to use e-mail or other online services for such messaging. These interactions should never occur on personal social networking or social media websites.

Patient privacy must be protected at all times, especially on social media and social networking websites. Breaches in patient confidentiality could harm the patient and violate federal privacy laws such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and applicable state privacy laws.

Failure to Comply With HIPAA Can Result in Both Civil and Criminal Penalties.

This penalty was the 21st financial penalty to be imposed by OCR in 2022 to resolve HIPAA violations, more than in any other year since it was given the authority to enforce HIPAA compliance. With the increased popularity and availability of social media platforms also comes an increase in potential privacy violations. To read a previous blog I wrote on this, click here.

If Notified of a HIPAA Investigation or Audit, Consult an Experience Health Law Attorney Immediately.

If you receive notice that you have a HIPAA Privacy Complaint, are suspected of a HIPAA breach, or are subject to a HIPAA audit, consult with an experienced health care attorney immediately. There are many technicalities to these laws and regulations, and what may initially seem like a violation may be proven to be nothing. Many defenses can be raised, and often a complaint may be dismissed by the OCR once the correct facts are shown to it by your attorney.

Don’t Wait Until It’s Too Late, Contact a Health Law Attorney Experienced in Defending HIPAA Complaints and Violations.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm represent physicians, nurses, 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 toll-free (888) 331-6620.

Sources:

Alder, Steve. “OCR Fines California Dental Practice for PHI Disclosures on Yelp.” HIPAA Journal. (December 14, 2022). Web.

McKeon, Jill. “OCR Settles Potential HIPAA Violation After Dental Practice Discloses PHI on Yelp.” Health Care It News. (December 14, 2022).

Health News Weekly. “California Dental Practice Pays $23,000 to Resolve Potential HIPAA Violations Involving Social Media Posts.” AHLA. (December 16, 2022). 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: PAlexander@TheHealthLawFirm.com 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.

2023-01-17T11:36:47-05:00January 17th, 2023|Categories: Dental Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

9th Circuit Says Former Federal Nurse Can Proceed With Medical Malpractice Suit Against VA Hospital

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

On September 29, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a former federal employee can sue the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). The suit alleges medical negligence that occurred during psychiatric treatment for a non-workplace-related injury.

As a result, the three-judge panel of the appeals court said that U.S. Navy veteran and VA nurse S.H.s’ lawsuit against a Seattle VA hospital can proceed. (Please note: we are not providing the nurse’s name out of respect for her privacy.)

In 2019, the district court dismissed S.H.’s federal tort lawsuit because the alleged malpractice occurred when doctors were treating an injury she said she sustained at her workplace. The district court reasoned that all existing or exacerbated injuries stemming from a federal workplace injury must be dealt with through the Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA), even malpractice claims.

Click here to view the district court’s order for the motion to dismiss in full.


Background Details.

The plaintiff in the suit is a veteran of the U.S. Navy who suffered a mental breakdown at work in October 2011. She sought follow-up psychiatric care at a VA hospital, where she allegedly received negligent treatment. At the time the treatment was sought, she was an employee of the federal government. She claimed years of workplace bullying and harassment by her supervisor caused her mental breakdown. She sued in 2016.

The FTCA authorizes plaintiffs to sue the U.S. for “personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment, under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred.” 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)(1). Any individual employee of the government acting within the course and scope of her job duties is immune from liability; the United States is substituted for that person in the suit.

The Big Question: Does the FTCA Authorize Suit by a Plaintiff in This Set of Circumstances?

Two factors complicate the answer in this case. First, when the plaintiff sought treatment, she was an employee of the federal government, working as a registered nurse at the VA hospital. Second, she claimed that her mental breakdown, the event that prompted her to seek medical care, was caused by workplace bullying and harassment at the hands of her supervisor. Hence, this would qualify as a work-related injury.

These facts bring into play another federal statute: the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act. FECA establishes a workers’ compensation blueprint that covers most federal employees. It is similar to state workers’ compensation laws.

When an employee sustains an injury covered by FECA, the remedy is to seek compensation under the act; they may not sue for damages under any other provision of law, including the FTCA. Therefore, had the plaintiff sued the U.S. under the FTCA to recover damages for workplace bullying and harassment, the district court would have been required to dismiss the action as barred by FECA.

In this case, however, the plaintiff is not suing for the injuries caused by workplace bullying and harassment. Instead, she is seeking to recover damages for the alleged medical malpractice by the individual doctors treating her.

Based on these facts, the appellate court reversed the district court’s judgment against the plaintiff in her Federal Tort Claims Act action. It held that the district court erred in dismissing the action on the grounds that it was barred by the FECA.

To view the ninth circuit court’s opinion in full, click here.

Consult a Health Law Attorney Who Is Familiar with Army, Navy, and Air Force Health Care Professionals and Their Problems.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm have represented federal physicians, nurses, dentists, and other health professionals in the Army, Navy, and Air Force, active duty and retired, as well as physicians, nurses, and other health professionals working for the Veterans Administration (VA) in the U.S. and around the world. They represent physicians and other health professionals with the Indian Health Service (IHS) and the Public Health Service (PHS). Representation has included disciplinary action, investigations, peer review investigations, clinical privileges actions, fair hearings, National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) actions, and appeals.

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:

Capriel, Jonathan. “9th Circ. Revives Psychiatric Med Mal Suit Against VA Hospital.” Law360. (September 29, 2021). Web.

Pazanowski, Mary Ann. “Former Federal Nurse Gets New Shot at Injury Suit Against US.” Bloomberg Law. (September 29, 2021). 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.

“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.

2022-12-29T19:01:33-05:00December 31st, 2022|Categories: Nursing Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

Florida Primary Care Practice Settles HIPAA Investigation for $20,000

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

On December 15, 2022, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Office for Civil Rights (OCR), announced that Health Specialists of Central Florida, Inc., will pay $20,000 to resolve alleged violations of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule’s right of access standard.

The primary care provider also agreed to a corrective action plan (CAP) with two years of monitoring.

It is extremely important that Florida physicians and health professionals remember that there is a federal law requirement under HIPAA that requires the timely furnishing of a health record requested by a patient. You must be sure to meet the deadline, but, more importantly, document that you have met it. Use cover letters, obtain receipts when possible, and document the date you provided the record in the record.

Click here to view the press release issued by the OCR.

Right of Access Standard.

OCR first launched an investigation into Health Specialists of Central Florida after the daughter of a deceased patient filed a complaint in November 2019. The complainant made a written access request for her father’s medical records but did not receive them for nearly five months, and only after multiple requests.

The HIPAA right of access standard requires covered entities to respond to requests for records within 30 days of receipt or 60 days if it obtains an extension of time. OCR’s guidance on the right of access is available here.

The Settlement.

In addition to the monetary settlement, Health Specialists of Central Florida will undertake a corrective action plan (CAP) that includes two years of monitoring. The CAP requires the practice to develop, maintain, and revise its written privacy procedures and policies, distribute them to the workforce, and review and update its right of access to PHI policy.

This case marks the 42nd case resolved under OCR’s HIPAA Right of Access Initiative. To view the settlement agreement and CAP, click here.

 

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

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm represent physicians, dental practices, medical groups, nursing homes, home health agencies, pharmacies, hospitals, and other healthcare providers and institutions in investigating and defending against HIPAA investigations and complaints 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 toll-free (888) 331-6620.

Sources:

Health Law Weekly. “Florida Primary Care Provider to Pay $20,000 to Resolve Right of Access Probe.” AHLA. (December 16, 2022). Web.

Giles, Bruce. “Florida primary care practice fined HHS $20K for not giving timely access to patient data.” Becker’s Hospital Review. (December 16, 2022). Web.

McKeon, Jill. “OCR Resolves HIPAA Right of Access Case With FL Primary Care Practice.” Health IT Security. (December 16, 2022). 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: PAlexander@TheHealthLawFirm.com 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 © 2022 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

 

 

2022-12-28T11:39:15-05:00December 28th, 2022|Categories: Health Facilities Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments

When the DEA Comes Knocking: 15 Tips If You Find Yourself Facing a “Routine” DEA Inspection

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

As the United States continues to open back up from the COVID-19 shutdown, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) is resuming on-site routine inspections.  Therefore, healthcare professionals must ensure compliance and regulatory efforts are in place.

This is part 1 of a 2-part blog series. Check back for part 2 of this blog series soon!


DEA Inspections and Site Visits:  Subpoenas.

DEA agents are often pushy, demanding, and intimidating.  They will try to use subpoenas (which are merely requests for documents that afford you at least ten days to produce the requested documents) as search warrants.  THEY ARE NOT.  They will try to use an administrative subpoena to obtain documents and get your testimony immediately. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PRODUCE THEM RIGHT AWAY. A copy of a sample subpoena used by the DEA is on our website for reference here.


Not Just a Routine Audit, Inspection, or Investigation.

Beware the “Notice of Inspection of Controlled Premises” (DEA Form 82).   Although the DEA often treats it as one, it is not a search warrant.  Also, it is probably NOT a “Routine Inspection.”  IT WILL NOT TAKE ONLY 15 TO 20 MINUTES.

We have had several clients who have had to close down their businesses all day to try to accommodate the demands of the agents performing their “routine inspection.”  The DEA should not cause you to shut down or should not cause you to turn away patients.  It should not interfere with your patient services or your ability to provide them.  You can ask them to come back at a later date.

The DEA often refers to “routine audits” as “Accountability Investigations” and requires the pharmacy or registrant to be given certain rights in connection with it. For example, DEA Form 82 states you are given the following rights:

1.    The constitutional right not to have an administrative inspection without an Administrative Inspection Warrant (AIW),
2.    Has the right to refuse consent to such an inspection,
3.    Presented with a Notice of Inspection,
4.    Given consent voluntarily, without threats of any kind,
5.    May withdraw consent at any time during the course of the inspection, and
6.    Incriminating evidence may be seized and used in criminal prosecution.

Although the DEA agent may tell you that the site visit is “completely random,” do not believe it.  If the DEA agent has brought a list of records to obtain from you, try to keep a copy of it, as your lawyer may find it very useful later when they are defending you.


What to Do When Confronted with a DEA Inspection or Site Visit.

1.    Notify the owner right away.  If you are not the owner, don’t sign anything, give permission, or agree to anything. You probably have no authority to do so.

2.    Call your health lawyer and get them over immediately.  This is an emergency!

3.    Yes, you have the right to consult with your attorney;  do not believe them if they say you can’t (which they may do, believe it or not).

4.    Request photo identification from everyone to ensure the individuals are who they say they are.  No identification? No access. Federal agents, including DEA agents, will always have their photo ID.

5.    Obtain a business card from each person present.  DEA agents always carry business cards.  If they do not have one, you will have to write all contact information for that agent from their photo id card (or photocopy, if they will allow you to do so).

6.    Do the same as the above for anyone else the DEA brings, whether they claim to be a federal or state investigator, Department of Health investigator, or local police. Please note that our experience has been that the DEA and state agencies contend that they don’t go on joint inspections or investigations (however, we don’t believe this to be true).  Therefore, get all parties’ information at the very start, or you may never get it until they testify against you.

7.    DO NOT SIGN A VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT TO RELINQUISH YOUR DEA REGISTRATION.  Agents may try to pressure and intimidate you into signing one by telling you it will be easier if you sign it. They might even try to scare you by warnings of criminal prosecution unless you sign it.  Yes, you have the right to consult with an attorney before deciding whether or not to sign it (they may falsely tell you that you don’t). However, once you sign it, it is gone.  If you are a prescribing physician or health professional, your authority to prescribe is gone forever.  If you are a pharmacy/pharmacist, your ability to order or fill any controlled substances is forever gone. So go ahead and put a sign on the door that says “CLOSED-Out of Business.”

8.    Before the inspection begins, you should be given a form to read and sign. If not, request it. It will usually be a DEA Form 82 “Notice of Inspection of Controlled Premises” Form. Before the inspection, it should be read, explained, agreed to, and signed, not during or after.

9.    Read the form carefully. You have the right to fax it, scan and e-mail it, or call and read it to your attorney before you sign it. If it says you have the right to refuse the inspection, consider putting it off until a later date. Especially if you are busy and have patients you must serve.

10.    Obtain a copy of the form (inspection form or subpoena) at the beginning and keep it.  You will need this later.

11.    Obtain a complete, detailed receipt for any documents, prescriptions, or other items taken by the agents. Again, since this is not a search warrant, the DEA does not have the authority to take your only originals and leave you without a copy.

12.    You may or may not be in serious trouble and subject to future criminal charges or administrative action to revoke your DEA registration. Your attorney should be able to evaluate this and advise you. Don’t bother to ask the agents, as they will not tell you what is in your own best interest to know.

13.    If you don’t have an attorney who is experienced in health law and DEA defense,  get one NOW.  You should begin preparing now.  It often takes the DEA a year or more to work up charges against you.  Once you are served with charges, you will only have a very short time to prepare your defense.  It is a completely unfair system for the subject of charges as the government will have longer to prepare its case against you than you have to prepare your defense.  Take advantage of the time you have. Do not waste it.

14.    Be polite and do not argue with a DEA agent.

15.    Do not volunteer information, but never tell a lie. Making a false statement to any federal agent is a felony criminal offense. A subpoena for documents is not an authorization to interrogate you.  A search warrant is not an authorization to interrogate you.

Lastly, don’t forget to check back to read part 2 of this blog series.

Please remember: This blog’s statements are opinions based on our experience.  If you do not agree with it, then you are probably the DEA.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Investigations of Health Professionals and Providers.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to physicians, pharmacists, pharmacies, medical groups, nurses, nurse practitioners, CRNAs, dentists, 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 (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 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: PAlexander@TheHealthLawFirm.com or fax them to (407) 331-3030.


KeyWords:
  Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) defense attorney, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigation attorney, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) order to show cause (OTSC) defense lawyer, DEA administrative hearing defense attorney, DEA administrative hearing legal counsel, Drug Enforcement Administration DEA investigation legal representation, health care defense lawyer, legal representation for health care facilities, legal representation for health care license defense, legal representation for health care professionals, legal representation for medical license defense, legal representation for over-prescribing controlled substances, legal representation for pain management physicians and pharmacists, legal representation for pharmacies, legal representation in DEA Order to Show Cause (OTSC) hearing, medical license defense lawyer, over-prescribing defense attorney, pain management prescription defense attorney, pharmacies and pharmacists defense attorney, pharmacy and pharmacist defense legal representation, prescription drug investigation defense attorney, representation for pain medicine prescribing, representation for physician over-prescribing, DEA attorney, DEA lawyer, investigation of a health care provider, medical license revoked, Office of the Inspector General (OIG) health care complaint, professional license revoked, relinquishment of DEA number, relinquishment of medical license, should I relinquish my DEA number, should I relinquish my medical license, voluntary relinquishment of DEA number, voluntary relinquishment of license, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm reviews, board legal representation for pharmacists, board legal representation for physicians, Board of Medicine attorney, Board of Pharmacy defense attorney, Department of Health complaint legal defense attorney, Department of Health Investigations, DOH investigation defense, DOH complaint lawyer, doctor over-prescribing defense lawyer

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2022 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

2022-11-12T21:39:07-05:00December 26th, 2022|Categories: Health Facilities Law Blog|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |0 Comments
Go to Top