In the latest twist on a False Claims Act (FCA) case involving a whistleblower, the defendants argued that the whistleblower’s lawsuit funding deal provides grounds for dismissal of the suit altogether.
Whistleblower Angela Ruckh’s $4 million agreement with a private litigation funding entity negated her right to pursue claims in the government’s name and requires the suit to be tossed, the defendants told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in mid-July in a petition for rehearing en banc, according to Bloomberg Law. The FCA does not allow assignment of government claims to third parties who don’t meet the whistleblower qualifications, they said.
The action stems from a suit filed by Ruckh, a one-time employee of Consulate Health Care, who accused the skilled nursing chain of overcharging Medicare and Medicaid by inflating therapy claims in 2011. In June, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated $85.1 million of a $347.9 million verdict against Consulate Health Care.
The total judgment against the chain was $347.9 million initially. A March 2017 jury verdict called for $115 million in Medicare and Medicaid damages, but that amount was later tripled by a federal court under provisions of the False Claims Act — adding a minimum penalty of $5,500 for each of the 446 cited false claims. A Florida judge later tossed out the judgment, saying there wasn’t evidence the government would have withheld payment if aware of the billing violations later brought by Ruckh.
In the June 2020 ruling, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stated that Ruckh did have enough evidence that a jury would have concluded the chain committed Medicaid-related fraud, Business Insurance reported.
From the September 2020 Issue of McKnight's Long-Term Care News
