St. Louis Park attorney James Vander Linden represents whistleblowers, company insiders filing claims for money recovered from employers suspected of stealing funds. He has spent years trying to recover Medicaid and Medicare dollars, and he doesn’t think the government has enough muscle to go after the big time health care fraud perpetrators.

“The real problem,” he says, “is corporate America.”

Read the rest or listen to the story below.

Medicaid fraud case nets $2.6M award

Friday April 29, 2011
By Barbara L. Jones

A team of lawyers including James G. VanderLinden, seated, and Robert P. Christensen, Brian Wojtalewicz and Neil P. Thompson took on Big Pharma and won. (Staff photo: Bill Klotz)

Once again, a team of Minnesota lawyers has taken on Big Pharma and won.

Neil P. Thompson, Robert P. Christensen, Brian Wojtalewicz and James G. VanderLinden recently settled a qui tam case against the pharmacy chain CVS for $17.5 million. The whistleblower/relator, pharmacist Stephani LeFlore of Minnesota, alleged that CVS designed a billing software program that consistently overcharged Medicaid for prescription drugs.

LeFlore and her attorneys will receive $2,595,460 under the state and federal False Claims Acts, and are also entitled to receive attorney fees from CVS. The reward is 16 percent of the settlement, a little bit more than the national average of 15.6 percent. The amount of the attorney fee is still under negotiation.

The four lawyers also sued Walgreens in 2005 for using a billing system that cheated Medicaid. That case settled in 2008 for $9.9 million with the whistleblowers – Thompson, who is a pharmacist as well as a lawyer, and another man – receiving $1.44 million plus fees.

In the CVS case, the fraud arose in connection with customers who were on Medicaid and also had private health insurance coverage. In the 10 states involved in the lawsuit – California, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Florida, Indiana, Alabama, Nevada, New Hampshire and Rhode Island – CVS was supposed to charge the insurance companies a certain amount for prescriptions, with a limited co-pay charged to the customers. This limited co-pay was assigned to Medicaid.

But LeFlore, who is a pharmacist at CVS, alleged that CVS consistently overcharged Medicaid for the co-pays. She claimed that overcharges occurred on hundreds of thousands of prescription sales for over five years. To support her claims, she first gathered data from CVS’s computers, Christensen said.

LeFlore was told by her attorneys to look to see how much CVS had billed Medicaid, and then contact the state and the insurance companies to see how much CVS was entitled to.

Because the same attorneys had handled the Walgreens case, it was easier to know what to look for, Thompson said.

“She … had a tip as to what to look for, because of the previous cases,” he noted.

Once LeFlore had collected the information, she and her attorneys could run the numbers and see a pattern, Wojtalewicz said.

Before filing their case, LeFlore’s attorneys wanted to make sure they were bringing good information to the table.

“We wanted to have some of the juice before we got to the government to build up our credibility, to prove our case,” Christensen said. “Not only do we have to sell it to ourselves, we have to sell it to the government lawyers and then it has to get sold to the defendant.”

Typically, a relator files a complaint under seal. This allows the government, if it decides to intervene, to investigate though its own channels before informing the object of the investigation. If the investigation reveals a basis for going forward, a judge partially lifts the seal and advises the defendant of the case. Then the parties may negotiate a settlement, keeping in mind that the law allows for treble damages and a penalty of $5,500 to $11,000 for each claim falsely filed, VanderLinden said.

As the case develops, the relator’s attorneys may find themselves in conflict with the government over their share.

“We often end up negotiating with the government,” Wojtalewicz said.

He said that many private lawyers who work with qui tam cases become frustrated because the federal attorneys are “smothered” in False Claim Act matters. “We think they cherry-pick. They take the biggest and most easily proven, and you can’t blame them.”

In this case, the government almost backed away because they didn’t think there were enough damages to make it worth pursing. But LeFlore’s lawyers persisted and the government eventually came around.

Qui tam cases are frustrating for the relator, noted Thompson, because he or she is generally still employed by the defendant.

“One of the important take-aways for lawyers … is to emphasize that the whistleblower should get advice early before he or she reports inside the company,” Wojtalewicz said. Otherwise, “you’re painting a big target on your back.”

Venue is an important issue in qui tam cases. In the LeFlore case, one of the first strategic decisions the team made was to sue in federal court in Wisconsin, which is in the Seventh Circuit. “Eighth Circuit opinions on false claims really are oriented to the corporations, not the whistleblower,” Wojtalewicz explained.

CVS, the giant retail pharmacy chain, has agreed to pay $17.5 Million to settle a whistleblower lawsuit accusing it of Medicaid fraud (“welfare fraud”).

THE FRAUD

According to her False Claims Acts lawsuit, CVS pharmacist Stephani LeFlore of Minnesota brought evidence to the government that CVS used a billing system for years that was designed to overbill Medicaid on prescription charges. Ms. LeFlore is represented by Minnesota attorneys Neil Thompson, Brian Wojtalewicz, Robert Christensen, and James VanderLinden, with local counsel Aaron Halstead of Madison, Wisconsin, where the case was filed in federal court.

It was done in relation to dual-eligible customers – those legitimately on Medicaid who also maintained their private health insurance coverage. The insurance coverages required CVS to charge the insurance company a smaller amount for prescriptions, and limited co-pay from the customer. When a person is allowed Medicaid coverage, the government always obtains an assignment of the person’s rights under their private health insurance coverage. The government essentially takes over the citizen’s rights under the coverage. This includes the common right to pay a smaller co-pay amount on prescriptions.

Ms. LeFlore claimed in her federal and state lawsuits that CVS should only have billed the Medicaid program the same limited co-pay on prescriptions that it would have normally billed the customer under the insurance plan. She alleged that CVS designed a billing software program for its pharmacies that consistently overcharged Medicaid on these co-pays. She claimed that these overcharges occurred on hundreds of thousands of prescription sales for well over five years.

The $17.5 Million settlement covers over-billings by CVS in the states of Minnesota, California, Massachusetts, Michigan, Florida, Indiana, Alabama, Nevada, New Hampshire and Rhode Island.

Ms. LeFlore first complained internally, but she was told by a supervisor that “corporate took care of the billing” and that she need not be concerned. She then retained her attorneys and commenced the False Claims Acts (qui tam) lawsuit in September, 2008. The lawsuit stayed under seal (non-public), according to the False Claims Acts and court orders, until the announcement of this settlement.

Ms. LeFlore and her attorneys will receive $2,595,460.00 as the reward under the federal and state False Claims Acts. They are also entitled to receive attorney fees from CVS.

STATE MEDICAID AGENCIES

Only CVS had the information necessary to reveal the correct, legal price established by the contracts of CVS with the insurance companies or related pharmacy benefit manager companies (PBMs). The states’ Medicaid agencies did not have this information. The Medicaid program is jointly financed by the Federal and State governments. It is administered by an agency in each state. Some state Medicaid agencies were aware of this wrongful billing potential, and directly addressed it in their rule making. Other states, particularly those states not included in the settlement, have missed the overbilling and are still paying it.

GOVERNMENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS

The government team on the investigation, negotiations and settlement was led by Leslie Herje, Assistant United States Attorney in Madison, Wisconsin, and Allie Pang, Trial Attorney in the Department of Justice, Civil Division, in Washington, D.C., with assistance from Nancy Mahoney, Assistant Attorney General in Massachusetts, and Elizabeth Valentine, Assistant Attorney General in Michigan.

Special Agents Jennifer Bowers and Gary Nelson of the federal Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, and Joni Connell and Tom Gomach of the U.S. Attorney office in Madison, Wisconsin, provided good assistance to the lawyers for the government in the investigation.

CVS PHARMACY, INC.

CVS, the nation’s largest retail pharmacy giant, operates with over 7,100 stores across America.

THE FALSE CLAIMS ACT

The original federal False Claims Act was made law by Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War Congress, to enlist citizen whistleblowers in the fight against fraudulent war industry profiteers. It empowers citizens by giving them a reward, and substantial legal rights against retaliation by employers. In its present form, the government and whistleblowers can recover up to three times the amount of the fraud, plus substantial penalties and attorney fees. Whistleblowers (who are called “relators” under the law) may recover from 15% to 30% of the amounts collected from the frauding corporation. At least 29 states have passed their own similar false claims acts, and many other states are in the process. The government has recovered over $5.5 Billion against frauding corporations just since 2009. Medicaid and Medicare fraud, along with military contracting fraud, are the largest areas for recoveries, but ethical citizens have exposed fraud in the education, environmental and transportation fields, and in other areas of federal and state spending. The new state laws will help honest citizen whistleblowers and the government bring corporations cheating state taxpayers to account. More citizens are also using the newer IRS whistleblower reward law to bring tax cheating corporations to justice.

THE LAWYERS

Ms. LeFlore’s attorneys Neil Thompson, Brian Wojtalewicz, Robert Christensen, and James VanderLinden have years of experience confidentially advising and representing citizen whistleblowers in false claims act cases.

Their website is false-claims-act.com

Neil P. Thompson

Law Offices of Neil P. Thompson

2249 East 38th Street

Minneapolis, MN 55407-3083

612-246-4788

nptrxlaw@gmail.com

Brian Wojtalewicz

Wojtalewicz Law Firm, Ltd.

139 N Miles St.

Appleton, MN 56208

1-800-377-1812

brian@wojtalewiczlawfirm.com

Robert P. Christensen

Robert P. Christensen, PA

670 Park Place East

5775 Wayzata Blvd.

St. Louis Park, MN 55416

612-333-7733

bob@rpcmnlaw.com

James G. VanderLinden

LeVander & VanderLinden, P.A.

5775 Wayzata Blvd.

670 Park Place East

St. Louis Park, MN 55416

952-767-6841

jim@vanderlindenlaw.com

Aaron N. Halstead, Esq.

Hawks Quindel, S.C.

222 W. Washington Ave., Suite 450

Madison, Wisconsin 53701-2155

Tel: 608-257-0040

ahalstead@hq-law.com

• Neil P. Thompson

Neil P. Thompson is uniquely qualified to observe and analyze fraud in

the pharmaceutical industry, as a licensed attorney experienced with class

action litigation involving pharmacy pricing and the Federal and State

False Claims Acts, and a licensed pharmacist for 34 years, both as a

pharmacy owner and working for over 130 different chain pharmacy

locations.

• Brian Wojtalewicz

Brian Wojtalewicz is the President-elect of the Minnesota Association for

Justice (formerly the Minnesota Trial Lawyers Association). For over a

decade he has been voted a Super Lawyer by his civil trial attorney peers

in Minnesota.

• Robert P. Christensen

Robert P. Christensen, P.A. is the Plaintiff/Consumer member of the

International Society of Primerus Law Firms in the State of Minnesota.

He is currently the Dean-Elect of the Academy of Certified Trial Lawyers

of Minnesota and Member of. the American Board of Trial Advocates.

• James G. VanderLinden

Jim VanderLinden has been an experienced and respected Minnesota trial

lawyer for decades. He is a member and past Dean of the Academy of

Certified Trial Lawyers of MN. He is also a member of the American

Board of Trial Advocates, an international organization of highly qualified

trial lawyers. He has been fighting corporate America for more than 3

decades.

• Aaron Halstead

Aaron Halstead is the past Chair of the Wisconsin State Bar Association’s

labor & employment law section, with over 20 years of success in the

labor and employment law fields. He is also on the Board of Directors of

the Workers’ Rights Center in Madison, Wisconsin.

Whistleblowers play the central role in ensuring corporate compliance with their ethical and financial obligations to the government and the American public. As false and fraudulent claims in the pharmaceutical industry continue to eat deeper into Medicare and Medicaid funds and threaten to derail health care funding in the U.S., the crucial role of whistleblowers in exposing health care fraud and abuse is receiving renewed attention from Washington. Recent studies indicate that 90% of health care fraud cases are uncovered and prosecuted by whistleblowers, leading to a recovery of over $ 3 billion from false claims lawsuits in the last three years.

Sen.  Grassley, who has long recognized the role of employees in uncovering enormous health care fraud in the pharmaceutical sector, commenced a laudable effort on June the 28th to verify the compliance of 16 major pharmaceutical companies with laws protecting their direct employees and indirect employees (employees of agents and contractors) and other whistleblowers from retaliation for exposing fraud on the government and taxpayers.  Sen. Grassley’s letters to the 16 pharmaceutical companies request updated data on their compliance with the law requiring a written FCA policy and employee training and education on the FCA, including the whistleblower provisions and anti-retaliation protections of the FCA, as well as State civil or criminal laws on exposing health care fraud and protecting the whistleblower.

Sen. Grassley’s efforts are meant to make it easier for individuals with knowledge or evidence of fraud to come forward without risking their career in the process, as well as to ensure that corporate policies have been updated to reflect changes in the law, and truly further the goals of the FCA by educating employees on the FCA and encouraging them to expose health care fraud. According to the senator, “drugmakers have a public responsibility to safeguard the tax dollars that pay for their products,” and to promote “a culture where those who speak up about possible fraud are rewarded rather than retaliated against.”

The 16 pharmaceutical companies targeted by the Senator are:

• Abb0tt Laboratories
• AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP
• Amgen Inc.
• Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation
• Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
• Eisai Corporation of North America
• Eli Lilly and Company
• Forest Laboratories, Inc.
• GlaxoSmithKline
• Johnson & Johnson
• Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc.
• Merck & Co., Inc.
• Novartis P Corporation
• Pfizer, Inc.
• Sanofi-Aventis, and
• Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.

They are expected to respond by the 20th of July with specific information on:

• Changes or updates to corporate policy on educating employees about the FCA
• Employee education on the whistleblower anti-retaliation provisions of the FCA, including avenues for filing false claim lawsuits
• Corporate process for handling employee complaints about possible FCA violations
• Performance of the corporate FCA compliance program in encouraging employees to come forward with allegations of possible FCA violations
• Corporate policies to ensure fair treatment of employee complaints of possible FCA violations
• Any complaints of unfair treatment or retaliation made by whistleblowers
• Any modification of FCA compliance policy in light of the extension of whistleblower protections to contractors and agents.

If you are seeing fraud on the government, contact us by calling 800-377-1812 for strictly confidential advice from experienced counsel, with no fee obligation.

Relevant Links:

Bloomberg News July 1, 2010 report
Press release from Senator Grassley’s office on the letters

The judges have been formally charged with “engaging in a scheme to defraud the public of their honest services, and with conspiring to defraud the Internal Revenue Service, in connection with a multi-million dollar honest services fraud scheme involving the placement of juveniles in juvenile detention facilities.”

If you are seeing fraud on the government, contact us by calling 800-377-1812 for strictly confidential advice from experienced counsel, with no fee obligation.

Eli Lilly has agreed to the resolution in order to resolve allegations that it promoted its drug, Zyprexa, for uses not approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) mandates that companies specify the planned uses of a product in its “new drug” application to the FDA. The FDA then determines whether or not the drug is safe and effective for its intended use. After its approval, a drug may not be marketed or promoted for non-specified, or off-label, uses.

Zyprexa, originally approved in 1996 as a treatment for manifestations of psychotic disorders and in 2000 for the short-term treatment of schizophrenia, was promoted by Eli Lilly for unapproved uses included the treatment for dementia, including Alzheimer’s dementia, in elderly people. The information contained in the agreements the Eli Lilly has signed allege that the company knowingly promoted Zyprexa for off-label uses, and trained its sales force to disregard the law. It also claims that Eli Lilly marketed Zyprexa to primary care physicians, despite Zyprexa having virtually no approved use in the primary care market. Through false marketing, Eli Lilly caused false claims for payment to be submitted to Medicaid, TRICARE, and the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, none of which provide coverage for off-label uses.

“Off-label promotion of pharmaceutical drugs is a serious crime because it undermines the FDA’s role in protecting the American public by determining that a drug is safe and effective for a particular use before it is marketed,” said Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division. “This settlement demonstrates the Department’s ongoing diligence in prosecuting cases involving violations of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and recovering taxpayer dollars used to pay for drugs sold as a result of off-label marketing campaigns.”

“The illegal scheme used by Eli Lilly significantly impacted the integrity of TRICARE, the Department of Defense’s healthcare system,” said Ed Bradley, Special Agent-in-Charge, Defense Criminal Investigative Service. “This illegal activity increases patients’ costs, threatens their safety and negatively affects the delivery of healthcare services to the over nine million military members, retirees and their families who rely on this system. Today’s charges and settlement demonstrate the ongoing commitment of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service and its partners in law enforcement to investigate and prosecute those that abuse the government’s healthcare programs at the expense of the taxpayers and patients.”

The global resolution includes the following agreements:

A plea agreement signed by Eli Lilly admitting guilt to the criminal charge of misbranding. Specifically, Eli Lilly admits that between Sept. 1999 and March 31, 2001, the company promoted Zyprexa in elderly populations as treatment for dementia, including Alzheimer’s dementia. Eli Lilly has agreed to pay a $515 million criminal fine and to forfeit an additional $100 million in assets.

A civil settlement between Eli Lilly, the United States and various States, in which Eli Lilly will pay up to $800 million to the federal government and the states to resolve False Claims Act claims and related state claims by Medicaid and other federal programs and agencies including TRICARE, the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, Department of Veterans Affairs, Bureau of Prisons and the Public Health Service Entities. The federal government will receive $438,171,544 from the civil settlement. The state Medicaid programs and the District of Columbia will share up to $361,828,456 of the civil settlement, depending on the number of states that participate in the settlement.

The qui tam relators will receive $78,870,877 from the federal share of the settlement amount.

A Corporate Integrity Agreement (CIA) between Eli Lilly and the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services. The five-year CIA requires, among other things, that a Board of Directors committee annually review the company’s compliance program and certify its effectiveness; that certain managers annually certify that their departments or functional areas are compliant; that Eli Lilly send doctors a letter notifying them about the global settlement; and that the company post on its website information about payments to doctors, such as honoraria, travel or lodging. Eli Lilly is subject to exclusion from Federal health care programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, for a material breach of the CIA and subject to monetary penalties for less significant breaches.

If you are seeing fraud on the government, contact us by calling 800-377-1812 for strictly confidential advice from experienced counsel, with no fee obligation.

The investigation resulted from Yale’s violations of the principle that federal grant recipients are only allowed to charge “allocable” costs, or those that relate to the specific objectives of the project, to each grant.  Allegations involving two types of mischarges arose from this violation.  The first, that some researchers at Yale improperly transferred charges to a federal grant account to which the charges were not allocable.  These fraudulent transfers were allegedly committed in order to spend remaining grant funds before their expiration date.  Federal regulations demand that unspent funds be restored to the government.

The second allegation involved some Yale researchers submitting time and effort reports for summer salary paid for by grants whose objectives were unrelated to the research.  It was found that these researchers were motivated to commit the wrongful salary charges because their academic-year salary is not paid during the summer, so the only salary received is that which they charge to federal grants.

Because of the settlement, in which Yale University cooperated fully, no lawsuit will be filed regarding the more than 6,000 grants contained in the agreement.  By entering into the settlement, the press release states, Yale did not admit liability and the agreement indicates that the parties settled the matter to avoid delay, uncertainty, and expense of litigation.  Yale has taken measures to enhance the management of its federal grants, upgrading its accounting and reporting systems in the last two years, and creating the Office of Research Administration, which oversees mandatory training programs for staff and faculty.

If you are seeing fraud on the government, contact us by calling 800-377-1812 for strictly confidential advice from experienced counsel, with no fee obligation.

Under the agreement, FORBA will pay the United States and participating states $24 million, plus interest, to resolve allegations that it caused bills to be submitted to state Medicaid programs for medically unnecessary dental services performed on children insured by Medicaid, which is funded jointly by the federal and state governments. These services included performing pulpotomies (baby root canals), placing crowns, administering anesthesia (including nitrous oxide), performing extractions, and providing fillings and/or sealants.

FORBA has further agreed to put in place various remedial measures designed to prevent similar unlawful conduct from occurring in the future. The government’s investigation of individual dentists is ongoing, and FORBA is cooperating with that investigation by providing information about dentists who may have violated professional standards.

“We will not tolerate Medicaid providers who prey on vulnerable children and seek unjust enrichment at taxpayers’ expense,” said Daniel R. Levinson, Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “This settlement reaffirms our commitment to protect the health and well-being of Medicaid beneficiaries and to ensure the integrity of this essential health care program.”

The government’s investigation was initiated by three lawsuits filed under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act, which permit private citizens to sue on behalf of the United States and share in any recovery. As part of today’s resolution, the three whistleblowers will receive payments totaling more than $2.4 million from the federal share of the settlement.

If you are seeing fraud on the government, contact us by calling 800-377-1812 for strictly confidential advice from experienced counsel, with no fee obligation.

The case was initiated by whistleblower Harrold Wright under the whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act, which allow private citizens to file actions on behalf of the United States and share in any recovery. Because Mr. Wright is deceased, his heirs will receive $12,303,787.88, plus interest, as part of this settlement.

Each month, companies are required to report to the Minerals Management Service the value of the natural gas produced from their federal and Indian leases and pay a percentage of the reported value as royalties. This settlement resolves claims by the United States that the Chevron, Texaco and Unocal companies systematically under reported the value of natural gas they took from federal and Indian leases from March 1988 to November 2008 and so paid less in royalties then they owed.

Specifically, the companies were alleged to have 1) improperly deducted the cost of boosting gas up to pipeline pressures, 2) used affiliate transactions to fraudulently reduce the reported value of gas taken from federal and Indian leases, and 3) improperly reported processed gas as unprocessed gas to reduce royalty payments.

“This settlement successfully ends long-standing litigation and ensures that taxpayers receive their fair share of royalty revenues from energy production on federal and American Indian lands,” said Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. “Most of the $45 million settlement will be disbursed to appropriate federal, state and American Indian accounts that were affected by Chevron companies’ underpayment of natural gas royalties and improper deductions.”

The suit brought by Mr. Wright alleges that a number of companies systematically underpaid royalties due for their production of natural gas from federal and Indian lands. The Justice Department previously settled with Burlington Resources Inc. for $105.3 million, Shell Oil Company for $56 million and Dominion Exploration and Production Company for $2 million.

If you are seeing fraud on the government, contact us by calling 800-377-1812 for strictly confidential advice from experienced counsel, with no fee obligation.

Specifically, the United States determined that St. John made payments to 23 individual physicians or physician groups to induce referrals for medical services. Federal law prohibits healthcare providers from billing federal health care programs for referrals from doctors with whom they have a financial relationship, unless that relationship falls within certain exceptions.

St. John’s fraudulent financial relationships were disclosed in a report filed by the health provider to the Department of Health and Human Service’s Office of Inspector General. The report suggested that the agreements with physicians may have violated federal law.

“The resolution of this matter yielded a substantial recovery for taxpayers, and it underscores our commitment to ensure that services reimbursable by federal health care programs are based on the best interests of patients rather than the personal financial interests of referring physicians,” said Tony West, Assistant Attorney General for the Department’s Civil Division.

If you are seeing fraud on the government, contact us by calling 800-377-1812 for strictly confidential advice from experienced counsel, with no fee obligation.