Healthcare Law

Healthcare Law Related Articles

CLIENT ALERT: Responding to CMS and Private Payor Record Requests and Audits

Government Investigations: When Not Responding is a Non-Option

False Claims Act Defendants Need Not Always Play Defense - Defendants Can Countersue Whistleblowers Under Certain Circumstances

Frier Levitt Adds Daniel Giaquinto, Esq. and Guillermo Beades, Esq., Bolstering Their Liability and Regulatory Practice Group

Why HIPAA Compliance Should Be a Priority

Overturned Conviction Casts Doubt on "Lack of Medical Necessity" to Support a Criminal Claim of Healthcare Fraud

Frier Levitt Attorneys Selected to the 2017 New Jersey Super Lawyers and 2017 Super Lawyers Rising Stars Lists

Qui Tam Case Against Physicians and Hospital Advances on What May Have Been a Technical Oversight

DiGuglielmo Joins Frier Levitt as Counsel

ACP Releases Revised Guidelines for the Prescribing of Opioids for Chronic Back Pain

Government Investigations: When Not Responding is a Non-Option

By Kendra E. Pannitti, Esq., and Jonathan E. Levitt, Esq.

It is not uncommon for multiple, or even parallel, investigations into the same provider to take place concomitantly. To be sure, oftentimes, a pharmacy or physician practice is served with a government’s investigative demand for documents or testimony only to be served with another demand by a different investigating agency or governmental body shortly thereafter. These investigations can be criminal, civil, or administrative in nature. 

A recent case out of the Eastern District of Louisiana brings to light the concretely dire nature of not responding to an investigation when a response is requested. In the aforementioned case, there was both a civil and criminal investigation into a provider’s submission of false claims through billing Medicare for services that were either not medically necessary or were not provided. A Federal Judge held that the provider was subject to a default judgment and ultimately ordered the relevant providers to pay $42.8 million to the Federal Government. The default judgment was found to be warranted solely as the result of the provider’s failure to respond to the civil False Claims Act investigation.

Juggling multiple investigations is certainly complex. Oftentimes, when faced with multiple investigations, providers may be tempted to refrain from responding to the investigations with lesser consequences in hopes that the investigation will be deferred or forgotten. However, as the above-referenced case demonstrates, not responding is a non-option. Indeed, it is important to respond to all investigations where a response is a required. 

However, just as failing to respond to an investigation can have deleterious consequences, so too can responding improperly. If you are under investigation or believe you soon will be, make sure you respond appropriately to all investigations. Frier Levitt has experience in responding to and defending multiple investigations into the same provider. Contact us today to speak to an attorney. 

Subscribe

 

Copyright © 2017, Frier Levitt, LLC. All rights reserved. All content of this blog is the property and copyright of Frier Levitt, LLC and may not be reproduced in any format without prior express permission. Contact us for more information or to seek permission to reproduce content. This blog is intended for general information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. The reader should consult with knowledgeable legal counsel to determine how applicable laws apply to specific facts and situations. Blog posts are based on the most current information at the time they are written. Since it is possible that the laws or other circumstances may have changed since publication, please contact us to discuss any action you may be considering as a result of reading this blog.