Two Northern California Doctors Face Sentencing in April 2018 After Being Convicted by Jury of Health Care Fraud After 8 Week Trial for Billing for Unperformed Services, Unseen Patients and Other False Billing Statements
Years ago, health care fraud cases would only be brought in extreme cases for ghost billing or outrageous conduct. We are seeing cases involving upcoding the office visit, not adding a physician to the group or not dropping the physician to the group, and for exaggerating conditions. A recent case seems to fit in that profile. Two physicians who went to trial and were convicted of some counts are awaiting sentencing. Dr. Vilasini Ganesh, a family practice physician and head of Campbell Medical Group, was convicted of 10 health care fraud and false statements relating to health care matters and Dr. Gregory Belcher (an orthopedic surgeon) was convicted of one count of making false statements relating to health care matters. Both were acquitted of some counts. There was an 8 week trial before the Honorable Lucy H. Koh, U.S. District Court Judge, and sentencing is now set for April 4, 2018 before the same judge.The government contended that the evidence at trial…
Read more detail on Recent Administrative Law posts –
Legal notice about the Two Northern California Doctors Face Sentencing in April 2018 After Being Convicted by Jury of Health Care Fraud After 8 Week Trial for Billing for Unperformed Services, Unseen Patients and Other False Billing Statements
rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.
Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Two Northern California Doctors Face Sentencing in April 2018 After Being Convicted by Jury of Health Care Fraud After 8 Week Trial for Billing for Unperformed Services, Unseen Patients and Other False Billing Statements?
- Sentencing Update: California Doctor Sentenced To 63 Months In Federal Prison For Health Care Fraud. Doctor's Testimony At Trial Resulted in Longer Sentence. Doctor Husband Sentenced to One Year and One Day.
- Los Angeles Clinic Owner, Physician, Office Manager, Insurance Biller and Former Insurance Investigator Indicted for Health Care Fraud. Charged With Billing for Services Not Provided and Giving Patients Free Cosmetic Procedures for Insurance Information.
- Psychiatrist Who Saw Patients by "Skype" Pleads Guilty to Health Care Fraud for Treatment and Billing for Workers' Compensation Patients
- Scripps Health to Pay $1.5 Million to Settle False Claims Act for Services Rendered by Physical Therapists Who Did Not Have Billing Privileges or Were Not Supervised by Authorized Provider
- Health Care Investors Beware: U.S. Attorney Sues Private Equity Firm For Portfolio Company’s Alleged Billing Fraud
- Two Northern California Urologists Agree To Pay More Than $1 Million To Settle Civil False Claims Act Allegations Related To Image Guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT) Referrals for Medicare Patients
- Owners, Managers, Employees & Patient Recruiter of Los Angeles Durable Medical Supply Business Convicted Of Health Care Fraud
- Florida Physician and Ex-Wife Indicted in Health Care Fraud Conspiracy For Alleged False Claims to Medicare and Blue Cross Blue Shield for Allegedly Using False Diagnoses of Rosacea, Acne, and Actinic Keratosis to Perform Chemical Peels, Dermabrasions, and Acne Surgery
- Key House Committee Votes To Advance Employer Mandate, HSA & Other Health Choice Reforms This Week; Prepares For Health Care Fraud Hearings Next Week
- Unsatisfactory rating voided because employee's "performance review," failed to comply with the employer's own procedures and thus undermined the integrity of the process Joyce v City of New York, 2018 NY Slip Op 03433, Appellate Division, First Department The Appellate Division annulled the determination of respondent New York City Department of Education [DOE] sustaining the "unsatisfactory" rating for the 2010-2011 academic year give to John Joyce, a tenured teacher. The court said that the record demonstrates "deficiencies in the performance review process" that resulted in Mr. Joyce being given an unsatisfactory rating for the 2010-2011 academic year. Citing Matter of Gumbs v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., 125 AD3d 484, and Matter of Richards v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., 117 AD3d 605, the Appellate Division noted that these deficiencies "were not merely technical, but undermined the integrity and fairness of the process." Mr. Joyce had received a satisfactory rating for the previous academic year and, in contravention of its own procedures, DOE failed to place him on notice that he was in danger of receiving an unsatisfactory rating for the 2010-2011 academic year until after April 28, 2011. Although DOE's procedures required that tenured teachers in danger of receiving an unsatisfactory rating have "formal observations including a pre-observation and post-observation conference by the principal … as part of a prescriptive plan to improve their teaching," Mr. Joyce received only one formal observation which took place one week before the end of the academic year and was not part of a prescriptive plan to improve his performance as a teacher. The decision is posted on the Internet at: http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2018/2018_03433.htm
This entry was posted in Administrative law
and tagged 2018
. Bookmark the permalink