US v Billings Hospitals
Holy Rosary Healthcare of Miles City, Montana and Sr. Vincent Healthcare of Billings, Montana both agreed to pay money to settle claims that they illegally and sinfully paid physicians to refer patients to their hospitals and then billed the taxpayers for those services. The employed physicians received more money if they referred more patients to the hospitals. The CEO of St. Vincent tried a spin that failed. The sister hospitals paid $3.9 million plus interest for their sins.
US v Adventist Health
White Memorial Hospital in California and its parent Adventist have agreed to pay $14.1 million to the state and feds for illegally paying physicians for referrals. They paid more than FMV for the physicians teaching services for family medicine residents. The hospital also sold supplies to physicians for under FMV. This is a whistleblower case so they get over $2 million of the payments.
US v Toumey Healthcare
A jury took only five hours to find the healthcare system and a 200 bed hospital guilty of illegal kickbacks to physicians under the Stark law and the False Claims Act. The verdict was for $39 million which may be tripled under the law. This may force the hospital to close. This was a physician whistleblower case.
US v Datkhaeva
Dr. Tatyanna Datjgaeva of Colorado pled guilty of charging for PT when all she was doing was cold light laser. She was sentenced to two years probation and repayment of $44,000 along with 100 hours of community service. For the Medicaid crimes she was sentenced to an additional 100 hours of community service and repayment of $33,000. She is also required to report this to the state licensing board.
US v Multiple People
The feds have raided multiple cities and arrested 89 people on charges of healthcare fraud. They arrested 25 in Miami, 11 in Baton Rouge, 2 in Houston, 13 in Los Angeles, 18 in Detroit, 7 in Chicago, 9 in Tampa, and 4 in Brooklyn. Top
Arkansas v Mann
Randeep Mann, a former physician who had his license lifted by the medical board and then was tried and convicted of attempting to kill the head of the Board. He was sentenced to life in prison. An appeals court overturned part of his conviction but his sentence will not change.
Pennsylvania v Gosnell
Dr. Kermit Gosnell of Philadelphia has been found guilty of murder of three possible live births during late term abortions. He injected the fetuses in utero with a drug that stopped the heart. He was also found guilty of manslaughter in one case of death of a mother. He was also found guilty of performing abortions past the 24 week limit in the state and 211 counts of not waiting the required 24 hours between the counseling and the abortion. The prosecutors sought the death penalty in the next phase of the trial but the court gave him life. Top
Forman v Marin Clearwater &
In a case that hopefully will stop the terrible legal practice of conflict of interest where the same attorneys defend both the hospital and the physician in a malpractice suit, Dr. Forman is suing the attorneys for legal malpractice. Dr. Forman was an anesthesiologist at Mercy Hospital in Nassau, New York and a bad baby case happened. All were sued and the insurance company immorally assigned the same attorney to defend all parties which is a conflict of interest. Dr. Forman agreed when asked by the attorneys to sign a paper and was told but it was not written that he would only be liable for a small percentage of the damages. He paid most of the damages and then the NY licensing agency took him to task which led to his quitting medicine. Whether Forman wins or loses the lesson is clear, NEVER ALLOW THE SAME ATTORNEY TO DEFEND ALL THE DEFENDANTS. THE SAME IS TRUE IN HOSPITALS WHERE THE MEDICAL STAFF SHOULD NEVER HAVE THE SAME ATTORNEY AS THE HOSPITAL.
Cooper v Takeda Pharmaceutical
Cooper sued Takeda after he developed bladder cancer and took Actos. The jury awarded $6.5 million and the judge said the causation evidence wasn't that good and reversed the verdict. The judge thought the plaintiff expert was inherently unreliable. This will be appealed.
Turner v SSM St. Clare Health Ctr
In a major screw-up the hospital prepped the wrong side of the head for a craniotomy. Prior to the surgery she could care for herself and now needs 24/7 care. The suit is for $25,000 or more and it will be for a lot more. It will be seven figures. There is no excuse to this to occur. Apparently the proper side was marked but the wrong side prepped and operated upon. The entire SSM organization is now under scrutiny.
Patients v St. Joseph Med Ctr
The medical center in New Jersey and Cardiologist Mark Midei have settled 247 cases of potential unnecessary coronary stents. The total amount was unknown. The hospital has already paid $4.9 million in false claims and $22 million for illegal kickbacks. The hospital has still about 45 suits pending. The University of Maryland has acquired the hospital but without paying for any of these debts. Top
Tummino v Hamburg
The federal judge blasted the government attorneys and Sebelius for not putting the Plan B pill on the over the counter market for ages 15 and older. He will rule soon on whether to let the government keep the medicine off the shelves while they appeal. This is the only time in history of the country that a political appointee has overruled the FDA.
National Assn. of Manufacturers v
The Obama administration took in on the chin twice in this ruling. The court ruled 3-0 that the NLRB had no right to rule that employers do not have to put up pro union posters. Two of the three wrote concurring opinions also stating that Obama had no right to appoint members of the NLRB. This latter issue is being contested in court by the Justice Department.
Nicklinson v England
The Lord Judge of England's High Court has spoken out before the trial as to whether or not to allow assisted suicide in England. He has said that he and his fellow justices will not look at public opinion polls as the public is too fickle. The case was originally filed by Mr. Nicklinson, who was a victim of locked-in syndrome, and when he was not allowed to get assisted suicide starved himself to death. Mrs Nicklinson and another locked in patient are now the plaintiffs. Top
Bhan v Battle Creek Health
Physicians are slow learners. They continue to throw good money after bad by suing hospitals for Discrimination after they have been terminated for quality concerns and they continue to lose. Here, a physician was terminated for quality concerns and wasted his money suing on a case that he was bound to lose. He thought that it was discrimination that the supervisor would not sit down with him or treat him professionally and of course it is not. He did not show how he was treated differently and the hospital did show they had good reason to terminate him. He was not even an employee. Top
Smoker v Iowa Bd. of Med.
In a great example of medical board animus and lack of professional judgment the board's recommendation against the physician was tossed. Smoker is an alcoholic physician who has gone through rehabilitation and realizes her problem. She was ratted on by a colleague for drinking at two social events when she has completed her health contract. The hospital monitor did what was to be done-nothing after the physician self reported and went back to AA. The dear colleague then ratted to the medical board who charged her with excessive use of alcohol which may affect her ability to practice medicine and a second charge of having a mental condition that would affect her ability to practice. The board dismissed the second charge but affirmed the first charge with challenges to her license. She sued and won in the appeals court since the board did no investigation on its own, the chief investigator testified there was no evidence against the physician and the psychiatrist agreed. One can only surmise what the board was thinking when they screwed up so badly. Top
DISCLAIMER: Although this article is updated periodically, it reflects the author's point of view at the time of publication. Nothing in this article constitutes legal advice. Readers should consult with their own legal counsel before acting on any of the information presented.