Jury Convicts Doctor and Medical Billing Company Owner for $28 Million Medicare Fraud Scheme

5 Indest-2008-2By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On May 1, 2017, a federal jury in Michigan found a Detroit-area doctor and owner of a medical billing company guilty of perpetrating a $28 million health care fraud scheme. The scheme involved billing Medicare for pain treatments that weren’t actually provided, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said.

Health Care Fraud Scheme.

Dr. Johnny Trotter and Elaine Lovett were both convicted after a four-week jury trial on one count of conspiracy to commit health care and wire fraud and three counts of health care fraud. In addition to the fraud scheme, both Trotter and Lovett also worked to dodge Medicare’s investigation into Trotter, according to the DOJ.

Evidence at the trial showed that between May 2008 and May 2014, both Trotter and Lovett fraudulently billed for services that were never provided. These services were predominantly nerve block injections, which treat pain by numbing groups of nerves.

In 2009, Medicare grew suspicious and began to require that claims submitted by Trotter satisfy a medical review prior to payment pre-payment review). As a result, both Trotter and Lovett conspired to dodge this investigation by starting fake medical centers, according to the prosecution said.

Trotter and Lovett attempted to hide their involvement by recruiting family members and employees to serve as “straw owners” of the companies. Meanwhile, the two fraudsters continued receiving payment for services that weren’t provided, the government said.

To learn more about health care fraud and the repercussions of Medicare fraud, click here to read one of my prior blogs.

Watch our short video blog on Medicare fraud and the audit process here.

Contact a Health Care Attorney Experienced in the Representation of Medicare and Medicaid Fraud.

The Health Law Firm and its attorneys routinely represent physicians, dentists, orthodontists, medical groups, clinics, pharmacies, assisted living facilities (AFLs), home health care agencies, nursing homes, group homes and other healthcare providers in Medicare and Medicare investigations, audits and recovery actions.

To contact the Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Kennedy, John. “Jury Convicts 2 Over $28M Medicare Pain Treatment Fraud.” Law360. (May 1, 2017). Web.

“Jury Convicts 2 Over $28M Medicare Pain Treatment Fraud.” Lexis Nexis. (May 1. 2017). 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.

KeyWords: Medicare audit defense attorney, Medicare fraud defense attorney, legal representation for Medicare fraud, legal representation for Medicare fraud investigation, Medicare Strike Force, legal representation for fraudulent claims, prepayment review attorneys, legal representation for submitting false claims, Medicare overbilling defense attorney, Medicare audit defense lawyer, legal representation for allegations of Medicare fraud, health care fraud defense attorney, Medicare fraud defense attorney, legal representation for Medicare termination, Medicarelegal representation for Medicare exclusion, OIG exclusion defense attorney, The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys

“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 © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Florida’s Baker Act: What You Need to Know – Part 2

10 Indest-2008-7By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

Our firm is frequently retained to act to obtain the release of individuals erroneously confined and held involuntarily under the Baker Act. We hope to share some of the lessons we have learned in representing such individuals and obtaining their release.

This is Part 2 of our blog on Florida’s Baker Act. To read Part 1 of this blog, click here.

Selected Examples of Some of Our Prior Cases.

Here are examples of actual cases in which we have been retained to obtain the release of a Baker Act patient. We have changed the facts somewhat to protect the identities of the individuals and the facilities involved.

Case #1: An independent elderly woman who still worked and was completely independent tripped and fell in her apartment, injuring herself. Her roommate took her to the local hospital emergency room to be examined and treated for the physical injury. The emergency room staff had her involuntarily confined in the hospital’s Baker Act unit and would not release her. She was not a danger to herself or to others. She was completely independent and held a good paying job. Her roommate drove her around and to medical appointments. She had never been diagnosed with a mental illness before and had never been Baker Acted before. Because of the Baker Act confinement, she missed several of her regular medical appointments which she had scheduled.

Case #2: The president of a medium-sized manufacturing company in another state came to Florida for a business conference at which his company had a display. On the last night of the conference, he partied late, drank too much and a friend took him to a hospital emergency room. He had a plane ticket to leave the next day. The hospital emergency room staff diagnosed him with depression and had him involuntarily confined under the Baker Act. He missed his flight home, and one of his company officials had to come to Florida to try to get him released.

Case #3: The fairly new wife of a businessman who worked a lot and who already had two small children, delivered twins. About six months later, the nanny quit at during the same week that they were supposed to move to a new home. The wife went to her OB/GYN for her routine follow-up visit. She was tired and run down from the loss of her nanny, getting ready to move, taking care of all of the small children, etc. Questioning by her OB/GYN indicated that she may have been depressed. The OB/GYN had his two nurses from his office walk her over to the hospital emergency room (which was next door) to be Baker Acted. Her husband and kids were then at home without a nanny and without mom. Mom was angry and upset because she was not suicidal, felt that she had been betrayed by her doctor and was not a threat to herself, her children or anyone else. She felt she was a prisoner, confined without any rights.

Case #4: A 14-year-old girl in high school broke up with her best friend around Christmas time. She was somewhat depressed and wrote down her thoughts about “ending it all.” Several months later, at the end of the school semester someone found the anonymous note (it had been inside her textbook) and turned it into the teacher. The teacher and principal are eventually able to identify the handwriting and confront the teenager. She admitted that it was her note but denied any suicidal thoughts. The principal called the sheriff’s department and sheriff’s deputies came and took her away to a Baker Act facility over her parents’ protests. She was then involuntarily confined there.

Case #5: A happily married mother of three young adults (who were in college and lived with their mother and father) had a long history of depression for which she saw her own psychiatrist on a regular basis (for more than ten years) and received prescription medication to control it. Her psychiatrist routinely adjusted her medications as needed. Her psychiatrist had recently adjusted her medication, but then was out of town on vacation for two weeks. She had a reaction to the medication adjustment. She telephoned her psychiatrist’s office and was instructed to go to the nearest hospital emergency room to have her medications adjusted. She did this. Instead of getting her medications adjusted, she was involuntarily confined in the hospital’s behavioral health unit under the Baker Act, Her husband (a professional) and her children, who live with her and depend on her, are distraught and could not convince the hospital or its medical staff to release her.

The cases above are all based on actual cases in which we were retained by the individual or the family. We were able to obtain the individual’s prompt release from the Baker Act facility.

Serious Problems We See Over and Over Again.

– The staff and treating physician constantly pressure the patient to convert their involuntary confinement (which may be expiring shortly, or there may be no grounds to renew it) to a voluntary admission. If this occurs, then they can keep the person as long as they desire. However, they threaten that if the patient attempts to leave, even though the patient is now there voluntarily, then they will have the patient involuntarily confined under the Baker Act.

– The patient is angry and upset at being imprisoned when he or she came to the hospital voluntarily for help. As a result, he or she rants and raves and threatens the doctors and staff with litigation or refuses to talk to them. This may serve to reinforce the doctor and staff’s concerns that the patient is mentally ill or irrational.

– Some of our clients have expressed concerns that because they have excellent health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, or TRICARE coverage (all of which cover hospitalizations), that they are being held involuntarily against their will when they should not be, while indigents who really have serious mental health issues are discharged immediately. They express concerns that they are being held involuntarily solely because the hospital and physician are getting paid to keep them.

– Individuals who have medical problems, but are successfully living independently and obtaining regular medical treatment for their ailments, may not receive the appropriate type of medical care they need when they are being confined in a psychiatric facility. Their prescription medications are at home, and they are not able to take their prescribed medications. Their regular treating physicians are not called or consulted. Their continuity of care is interrupted by the confinement.

– The regular treating physicians of those confined may not visit or see them while they are confined in a different hospital from the one(s) in which the treating physician has approved clinical privileges.

We Work to Get Victims Out Quickly.

Our firm has a process we follow to make sure that a person who should not be held under the Baker Act may be released in a very short time. If the basic criteria for a Baker Act confinement are not present, the person is not required to be held and should be released. If the person has been living independently for decades, has family and a support system available, and has had no prior mental health problems, the odds are he or she should not be involuntarily confined. We act immediately to begin our representation, to make the hospital and its physicians aware that we are representing a victim, and to take measures to obtain release. If required, we are prepared to file an emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with the local Circuit Court to have the victim brought before the judge for an emergency release hearing. These cases can be time intensive, require a great deal of immediate work, but can yield fast results in most cases.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Handling Victims of Involuntary Confinement Through the Baker Act Act.

The Health Law Firm represents individuals, families and friends in challenges to and hearings related to the Florida Baker Act and Marchman Act, when the basic criteria for confinement are not met and there is no medical necessity for further confinement.

Our firm has a process we follow to make sure that a person who should not be held under the Baker Act may be released quickly. We act immediately to begin our representation, to make the hospital and its physicians aware that we are representing the victim, and to take measures to obtain release. If required, we are prepared to file an emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with the local Circuit Court to have the victim brought before the judge for an emergency release hearing. These cases can be time intensive, require a great deal of immediate work, but can yield fast results in most cases.

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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Legal representation for Baker Act cases, Baker Act defense attorney, legal representation for involuntary Baker Act confinement, legal representation for involuntary confinement in hospital, legal representation for confinement in Baker Act facility, legal representation for mental health confinement, petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Baker Act attorney, Baker Act defense lawyer, Florida Baker Act defense attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, The Health Law Firm
“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 © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Florida’s Baker Act: What You Need to Know – Part 1

7 Indest-2008-4By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

At The Health Law Firm, we are frequently consulted by family members of individuals who are erroneously held under Florida’s Baker Act. An erroneous confinement under the Baker Act can occur for a number of different reasons. However, the result is that an independent citizen is confined in violation of his/her constitutional rights to liberty, privacy and the pursuit of happiness.

The Baker Act allows a licensed health professional to order an individual who is a threat to themselves or others because of a mental illness to be involuntarily held. The individual may then be held in certain designated health facilities for up to 72 hours for an initial psychiatric evaluation.

If the psychiatrist examining the confined individual feels that he or she should be held for further evaluation, then he or she can be held up to a week.

 

When to Call a Baker Act Attorney.

Over-cautious physicians, emergency room personnel, school officials, nursing home staff and other authorities may call upon the Baker Act to have those that they suspect may be a danger and have a mental problem involuntarily confined. If they are believed to be a threat, usually that individual may be legally involuntarily confined under the Baker Act. Seniors living on their own and teenagers are often the “victims” of this process.

If the individual being held under the Baker Act is not really a threat to themselves or others and the facility will not agree to release them, this is the time to call an attorney. Mistakes often occur as health personnel, school administrators and law enforcement personnel do not want to take the chance of someone committing suicide or killing others.

Factors that may indicate the person should not be held under the Baker Act include:

1. No prior history of mental illness or Baker Acts.
2. Supportive family/friends in the immediate area.
3. Acts/statements made not truly a threat to self or others.
4. Regular treating physician or health care personnel in area.
5. No current signs of mental illness.

 

Examples of abuses of the Baker Act that can occur:

1. Individuals who do not have a mental condition and do not meet the basic criteria for the Baker Act may be involuntarily confined and deprived of their freedom.

2. Children are involuntarily confined at facilities that are not really set up to take care of the medical and mental health needs of children.

3. Because of overcrowding, the person is taken to or transferred to a facility far away from his or her home, family and friends.

4. A person who has other medical problems or chronic medical problems (especially true with the elderly) is confined in a Baker Act facility and is unable to receive regular medical care or attend scheduled appointments with their regular treating physicians.

5. A person who is taking one or more prescriptions for medical problems will not be allowed to take them while confined in the Baker Act facility. This can lead to a deterioration of the person’s medical condition.

6. If the person has a regular psychiatrist or therapist, that person is not allowed to see or treat the person where he or she is confined because the therapist is not on the medical staff of the Baker Act facility.

7. If the person has a regular psychiatrist or therapist, that psychotherapist is, most often, not spoken to or consulted by the psychiatrist or staff of the Baker Act facility, even though the regular treating psychotherapist may know far more about the confined patients condition than anyone else.

8. An individual may be confined in a facility in which one or more dangerous patients are also confined. Our clients have reported assaults and sexual molestation which have occurred at such facilities when they were confined involuntarily under the Baker Act.

9. It has been reported to us by our clients that it seems if they have good health insurance (or Medicare) then they are kept longer because the insurance company (or Medicare) is paying the hospital for the inpatient stay, which can be a large amount of money.

10. Sometimes the family is located in another state and merely wants to have the person released so he or she can be taken where they are so the family is better able to support their needs.

Examples of How The Health Law Firm Can Help.

We often receive calls from the husband, wife, parents, children or friends of individuals who have been confined involuntarily to a mental facility. Often, we are called on to respond urgently to obtain the release of someone who may have been incorrectly confined to a mental institution without their consent.

Occasionally, we assist in cases in which the family may be located in another state and the patient is located here in Florida. Often, we are able to obtain a prompt release of the confined person in cases in which the basic requirements for an involuntary confinement under Florida Law do not exist and the patient should not have been confined.

We have been involved in working on an expedited basis with the hospital, mental institution or court to obtain the release of individuals who should not be confined or who desire to be released into the custody and care of their family or back to their own independence.

For a sample of an Emergency Petition for Write of Habeas Corpus we prepared with its supporting documentation, and which contains citations to the appropriate legal authorities, click here.  A Memorandum of Law (legal brief) in support of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is also included with it.

The Baker Act Is Not a Bad Thing.

We realize that the Baker Act is a good thing. Many people who may have serious mental health issues and fail to obtain treatment, should be involuntarily confined under the Baker Act. Sometimes this is the only way they will ever be treated correctly. Additionally, it is also a good thing that police, deputy sheriffs and other law enforcement officers are receiving training which is now resulting in more Baker Act hospitalizations and fewer arrests. This helps an individual to avoid a serious arrest and possible conviction of a serious offense (giving them a criminal record forever) when they may need only medical treatment for a mental condition.

Check this blog regularly for more on Florida’s Baker Act and the Marchman Act.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Handling Victims of Involuntary Confinement Through the Baker Act and Marchman Act.

The Health Law Firm represents individuals, families and friends in challenges to and hearings related to the Florida Baker Act and Marchman Act, when the basic criteria for confinement are not met and there is no medical necessity for further confinement.

Our firm has a process we follow to make sure that a person who should not be held under the Baker Act may be released in a very short time. If the basic criteria for a Baker Act confinement are not present, the person is not required to be held and should be released. If the person has been living independently for decades, has family and a support system available, and has had no prior mental health problems, the odds are he or she should not be involuntarily confined. We act immediately to begin our representation, to make the hospital and its physicians aware that we are representing you, and to take measures to obtain release. If required, we are prepared to file an emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with the local Circuit Court to have you brought before the judge for an emergency release hearing. These cases can be time intensive, require a great deal of immediate work, but can yield fast results in most cases.

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., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.
KeyWords: Baker Act defense attorney, legal representation for Baker Act cases, legal representation for involuntary Baker Act confinement, legal representation for involuntary confinement in hospital, mental health confinement defense attorney, petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Baker Act attorney, Baker Act defense lawyer, legal representation for Florida Baker Act, Florida Marchman Act defense attorney, legal representation for Baker Act law, The Health Law Firm, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys, The Health Law Firm 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 © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

City of Fort Myers, Florida, Agrees to Pay $149,000 to Settle Dispute With Mental Health Facility

6 Indest-2008-3By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On February 3, 2017, the city of Fort Myers, Florida, agreed to pay $149,000 to settle a discrimination-related real estate zoning and licensing dispute with Sovereign Health of Florida Inc., a rehabilitative mental health and addiction treatment provider.

Sovereign Health, which opened January 2015, filed a federal lawsuit alleging that the city of Fort Myers violated discrimination and disability laws by trying to shut it down after nearby residents started to complain about the center and the crime they believed it would bring to the community. According to the lawsuit, the city allegedly violated the rights of the provider’s disabled patients under Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations.

The Federal Suit.

In April 2015, Sovereign Health filed a complaint that stated that two years earlier, the treatment provider had met with representatives for the landowner to discuss entering into a long-term lease for the property. The representatives for the land owner then contacted the city to get a zoning verification letter, telling the city of Fort Myers the property would be used for onsite residential mental health treatment. Despite this, neighbors living near the facility learned about the facility’s use and began to complain that crime would increase as a result of the individuals living at Riverside. In response Sovereign Health stated in its complaint, “None of the complaints were based on any legitimate land use-based reason such as traffic or density. Instead, the complaints were based on illegitimate, irrational fears associated with the type of individuals (i.e., individuals in recovery from addiction) who were living at the Riverside Property.”

In its own response, the city of Fort Myers refused to accept Sovereign Health’s application for a business tax receipt license and issued a cease and desist order citing it for operating without a license. The city also reversed its zoning position, saying the facility was only allowed in an industrial zoning district, according to the complaint.

Terms of the Settlement.

As part of the settlement agreement, the city will pay a Tampa-based law firm $99,000, as well as cover any of Sovereign Health’s expenses up to $50,000 that enhance security for the facility and the surrounding residents. Security cameras, additional or improved lighting and gate improvements would all be covered. The facility at the center of the discrimination lawsuit will continue to operate as it has since first opening its doors, Sovereign Health said in a statement. The city of Fort Myers continues to dispute the discrimination claims and admits no wrongdoing, as part of the agreement.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced Investigations of Mental Health Counselors, Psychologists, Social Workers and Family Therapists.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to mental health counselors, psychologists, social workers and family therapists in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, FBI 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:

Hansen, Joyce. “Fort Myers, Fla., Settles With Sovereign Health For $149K.” Law360. (February 7, 2017). Web.

Dulaney, Corey. “Fort Myers spends $149K to settle drug rehab dispute.” News Press. (February 7, 2017). Web.

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, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Legal representation for mental health professionals, defense lawyer for mental health professionals and facilities, mental health professional defense attorney, health care discrimination defense attorney, legal representation for physicians, complex health care litigation attorney, business litigation lawyer, health care professionals legal representation, health law defense attorney, legal representation for discrimination against health care professionals and facilities, legal representation for discrimination lawsuit against a healthcare professional or facility, healthcare litigation defense attorney, legal counsel for health care professionals, legal representation for clients involved in the health care industry, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, The Health Law Firm

“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 © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Appeals Court Affirms $1.37 Million in Sanctions Against Doctor for Dismissed Defamation Suit Against Former Employers

7 Indest-2008-4By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On November 16, 2016, an appeals court in Texas affirmed a $1.37 million sanction assessed against a doctor. The doctor was ordered to pay the sanction after the dismissal of a defamation lawsuit he filed against his former employers. The doctor’s former employers were Baylor College of Medicine (Baylor) and Texas Children’s Hospital.

The case had previously been appealed to the Texas Supreme Court. This makes the November 16, 2016, opinion the second time the Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals has had to rule on the case. Additionally, it is the second time that it has held that the sanctions against Dr. Rahul K. Nath were justified.

The Back Story of the Case.

According to the opinion, Dr. Nath was employed by Baylor as a plastic surgeon and was affiliated with Texas Children’s Hospital. He was allegedly terminated in 2004. In February 2006 he filed a lawsuit against his former supervisor at Baylor and Texas Children’s. According to court documents, Dr. Nath had accused his former supervisor of making defamatory statements about him after he stopped working there. The alleged defamatory statements included that Dr. Nath had been fired, was unqualified and lacked professional ethics and integrity.

To read the court opinion, click here.

Was the Former Employer Responsible for Accumulated Fees?

The Texas high court was considering whether the behavior of Baylor or Texas Children’s was ultimately responsible for the attorney’s fees that had been accrued in the case. Previously, the trial court found that both Texas Children’s and Baylor’s actions had not caused the litigation expenses which Dr. Nath was assessed. The trial court wrote that the amount was appropriate as it was “far less” than the actual fees incurred by either party in defending Dr. Nath’s claims.

On appeal, Dr. Nath argued that the trial court hadn’t held a proper evidentiary inquiry and that it had based its sanctions award on “conclusory and self-serving” affidavits. Dr. Nath claimed that he was wrongly denied discovery in the case. To learn more about Dr. Nath’s legal challenge, click here.

Despite Dr. Nath’s arguments, the court of appeals disagreed, holding that the trial court followed the Supreme Court’s instructions in deciding to impose the sanctions. Additionally, the court found that there was evidence in the record to support the conclusion that neither Texas Children’s nor Baylor’s conduct caused the legal expenses that were passed on to Dr. Nath as sanctions.

Adequate Supporting Evidence.

The first time the case came before the Fourteenth Court of Appeals, it affirmed the sanctions against Dr. Nath. The high court held that there was evidence to support the trial court’s finding of bad faith and improper purpose on Dr. Nath’s part with regard to certain filings in the case. Dr. Nath appealed, and the Texas Supreme Court held that the trial court didn’t abuse its discretion in finding the doctor had exercised bad faith and improper purpose in certain filings.

To learn more about defamatory statements and how to handle such claims, click here to read one of my prior blogs.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys.

The Health Law Firm routinely represents physicians, pharmacists, dentists, nurses, medical groups, health facilities, nurses and other health providers in complex litigation, investigations, Medicare Audit defense, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, inspections and audits involving the DEA, Department of Health (DOH) and other law enforcement agencies. Its attorneys include those who are board certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law as well as licensed health professionals who are also attorneys.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Knaub, Kelly. “Texas Appeals Court Affirms Doc’s $1.3M Sanction.” Law360. (November 16, 2016). Web.

Knaub, Kelly. “Doc To Challenge $1.3M Sanction Before Texas High Court.” Law360. (January 15, 2014). Web.

“Texas Appeals Court Affirms Doc’s $1.3M Sanction.” LexisNexis. (November 16, 2016). Web.

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, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Legal representation for physicians, complex health care litigation attorney, business litigation lawyer, health care professionals legal representation, physician lawyer, health law defense attorney, legal representation for defamatory statements against health care professionals, legal representation for defamation lawsuit against a healthcare professional, healthcare litigation defense attorney, legal counsel for health care professionals, legal representation for clients involved in the health care industry, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, The Health Law Firm, legal fees expert witness, attorney’s fees and sanctions expert witness, health care litigation expert witness, health law expert witness
“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 © 2016 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Major Health Care Reform Bill On FDA Approvals, Mental Health Policy Clears House

8 Indest-2008-5By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On November 30, 2016, the House of Representatives passed the 21st Century Cures Act. The new bill overwhelmingly passed wide-ranging legislation meant to overhaul the drug approval process, boost biomedical research, and many other significant health-related policies.

The Bill.

The bill would change research prioritization and medication review rules at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Additionally, it would push medication development rules for a variety of items including new antibiotics to medical devices. The mental health reforms, originally developed in Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Reform Act of 2016, would create a greater emphasis on evidence-based mental health treatments. It aims to increase cooperation between federal agencies on mental health policy.

The bill passed with a 392-26 vote, largely supported by Republican National Committee (GOP) leaders like whip Steve Scalise, R-La. Scalise called the legislation an advance that would save millions of lives and move medical innovation back to U.S. shores.

Providing Additional Funding.

In addition to the push for medical development, the bill also encompasses a host of other big initiatives. This includes more than $5 billion in funding for the NIH and money to help the FDA; $1 billion for tackling the opioid epidemic; and provisions that are meant to help pair Americans who suffer from serious mental illnesses with available psychiatric beds.

The bill is expected to pass the Senate by the beginning of December 2016.

To learn more about the importance of raising awareness about mental health issues, click here to read one of my prior blogs on this topic.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in the Representation of Psychiatrists, Mental Health Counselors, Psychologists, Social Workers, and Marital and Family Therapists.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to psychiatrists, mental health counselors, psychologists, social workers and family therapists in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, medical malpractice investigations, business transactions, contracts, structuring business ventures, clinical privileges actions, professional licensure matters, Board hearings, business litigation, Medicare and Medicaid audits, and other types of investigations of health professionals and providers.

Often the early advice and representation of an experienced health law attorney can help avoid discipline which will be on your record for a lifetime.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Mukherjee, Sy. “House Just Passed the Biggest Health Reform Bill Since Obamacare.” Fortune. (November 30, 2016). Web.

Macagnone, Michael. “Bill On FDA Approvals, Mental Health Policy Clears House.” Law360. (November 30, 2016). Web.

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, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Legal representation for mental health professionals, legal representation for medical development, mental health defense lawyer, legal counsel for mental health counselors and professionals, legal representation for psychiatrists, psychologist defense attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, The Health Law Firm, attorney for mental health counselors, psychologist defense attorney, mental health legislation, additional funding for medical development and mental health policies, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigations, FDA investigation defense attorney

“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.

Florida Court Denies Motion to End Patient Wrongful Death Suit Despite Settlement

7 Indest-2008-4By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On November 15, 2016, The Florida Supreme Court refused to dismiss a lawsuit over the death of an escaped psychiatric hospital patient for the second time. The suit questions the thin line between medical and ordinary negligence, even though the parties settled their dispute several months ago.

The justices offered no explanation when they denied a motion from defendant-appellee Shands Teaching Hospital and Clinics Inc. (Shands) asking them to reconsider that ruling. Additionally, the court also maintained the same 4-3 split across both orders.

The Background.

The ongoing case stems from the January 23, 2013, death of Ashley Lawson. She escaped from Shands Psychiatric Hospital in Gainesville, and was struck and killed by a tractor trailer on Interstate 75.

According to the facts from the case that was filed, Lawson was admitted to the hospital on November 1, 2012, with a history of psychiatric illness, drug abuse, impulsive behavior and multiple suicide attempts. She was later transferred to the locked inpatient unit for her own safety, according to her estate’s initial jurisdictional brief.

As a result of a Shands employee allegedly leaving her key and badge unattended, Lawson was able to escape. Her estate, bringing the suit on her behalf, argued that the case was one of ordinary negligence and not a medical malpractice case. A medical malpractice case carries various strict presuit requirements under the Florida Medical Malpractice Act, including a presuit notice and the affidavit of a physician expert, which the estate did not provide.

Denied Motion to Dismiss.

The suit made its way to the state’s highest court as the estate sought reversal of a decision by the First District Court of Appeal to quash a lower court’s order that had denied Shands’ motion to dismiss. According to the estate’s brief, the Court of Appeal reviewed the case on its own, reaching its 8 to 6 decision, after a three-judge panel could not reach a definitive result.

Ashley Lawson’s estate argued the First District Court of Appeal’s decision stood in conflict with the Fifth District Court of Appeal’s decision on what constitutes ordinary negligence versus medical malpractice. This conflict would give the Florida Supreme Court the authority to decide what the law actually states.

In the hospital’s defense, Shands argued that the case is not a high-profile matter of great public interest, and has no effect on the “due process rights of life or liberty for a sizable group of Floridians.”

Negligence is one of the most common claims used against doctors. It is important to familiarize yourself with the repercussions and ways to avoid it from happening to you in the first place. Click here to read one of my prior blogs to learn more.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in the Representation of Psychiatrists, Mental Health Counselors, Psychologists, Social Workers, and Marital and Family Therapists.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to psychiatrists, mental health counselors, psychologists, social workers and family therapists in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, medical malpractice investigations, business transactions, contracts, structuring business ventures, clinical privileges actions, professional licensure matters, Board hearings, business litigation, Medicare and Medicaid audits, and other types of investigations of health professionals and providers.

Often the early advice and representation of an experienced health law attorney can help avoid discipline which will be on your record for a lifetime.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Hale, Nathan. “Fla. High Court Says Deal Doesn’t Stop Patient Death Case.” Law360. (November 28, 2016). Web.

Frellick, Marcia. “Florida Court Rules Physician May Be Liable in Suicide.” Medscape. (August 25, 2016). Web.

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, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Legal representation for medical negligence, legal representation for medical malpractice, identifying the difference between medical and ordinary negligence, legal representation for mental health professionals, mental health defense lawyer, legal counsel for mental health counselors and professionals, mental health defense lawyer, legal representation for psychiatrists, psychologist defense attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, The Health Law Firm, attorney for mental health counselors, psychologist defense attorney, psychiatry negligence defense counsel

“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 © 2016 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.