Illinois Jury Found Nursing Home Liable For $28.1 Million In Whistleblower Case Alleging Substandard Care And Resident Abuse

An Illinois district court jury in United States v. Momence Meadows Nursing Center, Inc. recently issued a verdict on February 11, 2013 imposing $28.1 million in civil penalties on the operators of a nursing home. The nursing home and its prior owner were held liable under the False Claims Act and the Illinois Whistleblower Reward and Protection Act for fraudulent billing of worthless services and false certification that the nursing home was in compliance with federal and state patient care regulations.

Past employees of Momence Meadows Nursing Center brought this whistleblower action alleging that the nursing home defrauded Medicare and Medicaid by providing substandard care that left residents neglected and abused. The plaintiffs provided evidence of noncompliance with normal nursing home procedures, which caused, for example, resident burns, failure to contain a scabies outbreak, and failure to follow proper procedures regarding the prevention and care of pressure ulcers. In addition, the plaintiffs alleged that the nursing home retaliated against them after complaining about inadequate care and manipulated records to show residents received appropriate care.

The jury imposed the $28.1 million verdict by reaching two main determinations:

  • The defendants made 1,729 false or fraudulent claims. With an $11,000 civil penalty per occurrence, this amounted to more than $19 million.

  • The government lost over $3 million due to the nursing home providing worthless services, which resulted in an additional $9.1 million in penalties.

The plaintiffs were also awarded over $400,000 collectively for their retaliation claim.

What Providers Should Know

  • This is one of the first False Claims Act cases in Illinois that centers on quality of care in a nursing home.

  • The plaintiffs brought this case, in part, under a state law not traditionally used—the Illinois Whistleblower Reward and Protection Act.

  • The jury verdict highlights the tremendous liability that may arise from allegations of substandard care, particularly in the area of skin care.

  • There is a potential that more plaintiffs' attorneys will look toward this type of action, given its newfound success.

For More Information

For questions, please contact:


Written by:

Published In:

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Polsinelli | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.