PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - SECURE 2.0 Act - More Relief for Plan Administrators
Recent Tenth Circuit Decision in John Q Hammons Fall Following SCOTUS’ Decision in Siegel v. Fitzgerald Could Result in Significant Refunds for Certain Chapter 11 Debtors
Nuts and Bolts of a Repayment Investigation: Keys to Conducting Investigations Under the 60-Day Repayment Rule
Hospice Audit Series: The Latest Developments and Strategies for Success in the Ever-changing Audit Landscape
Gentiva, the renamed former Kindred at Home, agreed to pay $19.4 million to resolve claims that its predecessor company, Kindred at Home and related companies, violated the False Claims Act by retaining overpayments for...more
“Corporate evasion is corporate fraud,” the California Attorney General declares in a March 22, 2022 press release accompanying an unclaimed property complaint the State has filed alleging systemic failure to report and remit...more
On June 29, 2021, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a settlement with California skilled nursing facility operator Plum Healthcare Group LLC and facility Azalea Holdings LLC dba McKinley Park Care Center (Plum) to...more
This edition of Qui Tam Quarterly focuses on: - the history of big data in health care FCA investigations and litigation; - how the government has increased its ability to gather health care claims data and use it to...more
The year 2019 was another active year in False Claims Act (FCA) investigations and litigation. Although the year lacked a singular blockbuster case, there were decisions of particular note. The Supreme Court clarified the...more
Health care attorneys have long questioned whether there are significant Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) risks associated with financial transactions between Medicare Advantage plans and their participating providers. An ongoing...more
• Reasonable disagreement among clinicians, by itself, does not result in a false claim. • Clinical judgment must be objectively false to constitute an FCA violation. • A clinical judgment may only be objectively false...more
On June 26, 2019, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio granted a motion to dismiss a qui tam lawsuit against HCR ManorCare Inc. and its subsidiaries, including Heartland Hospice Services, LLC...more
On June 17, 2019, the U.S. District Court of the District of Massachusetts rejected Massachusetts General Hospital’s (MGH) request to dismiss a qui tam complaint alleging that the teaching hospital fraudulently overbilled...more
On December 11, 2018, the United States announced that it has elected to intervene in a False Claims Act (FCA) lawsuit filed against Sutter Health and its affiliated entity Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) alleging that...more
A recently unsealed qui tam action further demonstrates the growing focus on the propriety of incentive payments made under Medicare and Medicaid's Electronic Health Records (EHR) Incentive Programs. Health care providers...more
On October 13, 2017, a Jacksonville cardiovascular practice entered into an approximately $440,000 settlement to resolve allegations concerning violations of 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7k (the 60-Day Overpayment Rule) and its Florida...more
The District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee held on June 22, 2017, that the timing requirements related to a physician's certification of need for home health services were not "material" to the Centers for...more
We are pleased to present Bradley’s annual review of significant False Claims Act (FCA) cases, developments, and trends. From a relatively short article several years ago, the Review has grown to a significant publication...more
The Federal False Claims Act (“FCA”) provides a very strong enforcement tool to the federal government. The FCA also provides the opportunity for whistleblowers to bring “qui tam” cases and collect a portion of the recovery...more
When Congress originally passed the False Claims Act (31 USC §§ 3729-3733), no one had the health care system in mind. The False Claims Act was also commonly referred to as the “Lincoln Law”. The original law was focused on...more
A recent settlement illustrates the broad reach of the FCA and the substantial liability that “mere retention” of an overpayment can impose on contractors several steps removed from a government contract. The dispute...more
With Halloween looming, a discussion of skeletons that may be lurking in a health care provider’s closet is timely. Many of our previous posts, as well as the monthly Qui Tam Updates published by our Health Care Enforcement...more
Trends & Analysis: ..We have identified 15 health care–related qui tam cases that were unsealed since our last Qui Tam Update. Of those, 12 were filed from 2012 to the present. All but two cases had been pending more...more
The first case to interpret when the clock begins to run on the “60-Day Rule” did not go well for health care providers. On August 3rd, the Southern District of New York rejected defendants HealthFirst, Inc.’s and Continuum...more
In an eagerly anticipated decision issued on August 3, 2015, in an order denying the defendant hospitals’ motion to dismiss, the Southern District of New York became the first court to interpret and define the extent of a...more
On August 3, 2015, Judge Edgardo Ramos of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued the first judicial opinion addressing when a health care provider has “identified” a Medicare or Medicaid...more
On August 3, 2015, in United States ex rel. Kane v. Healthfirst, Inc., et al., No. 1:11-cv-02325 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 3, 2015), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued the first reported...more
In a highly anticipated ruling in Kane ex rel United States, et al. v. Health First, Inc., et al., a New York federal judge has issued the first judicial interpretation of the sixty-day overpayment return provision in the...more
The court’s interpretation complicates the already difficult task providers face in having sufficient time to assess and quantify potential overpayments. An August 3 decision in United States v. Continuum Health Partners...more