Wednesday, December 18, 2013

For People with a Financial Interest in My Case

     The government just filed its response to my Motion to Dismiss.  It's a 23-page document, therefore a real bummer to convert and download to my blog.  But I know the whistleblowers are dying to see it,  therefore I'll get right to work on it.
     If it appears that this case may be veering in a favorable direction for you, why not start planning your (next?--depending on how often you succeed at this) round-the-world vacation, or pay off your mortgage, or--imagine it!--procure and "run" a rural medical medical clinic, if you can. (Be careful who you hire.)  The country needs people like you to bring healthcare to the underserved.  You're apt to get a golden goose in the process, should you take over an existing clinic:  simply report the previous doctor for fraud and abuse!  It's well-nigh a guarantee that you'll cash in, given the cockamamie world of Medicare and Medicaid billing which offers multiple avenues of accusation and, eventually, collection of hefty whistleblower bonuses.  But it could take a long time:  the statutes of limitations on fraud allegations are five to ten years and the government doesn't move quickly on its projects.
     Except when it comes to raiding and pillaging businesses.  Federal authorities can mobilize SWAT teams from across the country in a day if they decide that a solo doctor is a threat.  It seems not to matter that clinic workers don't carry guns and aren't violent.  The government prepares for the worst.  FBI agents show up with their costumes and gear--guns, bludgeons, bullet-proof vests, maybe tear gas--as though marching into battle against a prodigious, armed enemy.
     Being raided is a terrifying experience for nurses and medical technicians, but this is the price we pay for national safety.
     Well, I won't waste time rambling on about the same old same old.  On to Zamzar to convert the pdf file to word, and Mediafire to download it to the web, for everyone in the world to see.

6 comments:

  1. There is a good chance that you will triumph in your case, only to be sued by the person that bought your clinic. You have suggested in dozens of posts that this person benefited from the failure of the Hawthorne clinic her subsequent bankruptcy. Actually, you suggested that this was all premeditated with a whistle-blower suit as the goal. Do you have any evidence?

    I'm sympathetic to your cause and think you might win, but I think you might have made a mistake defaming the person that is suing you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Defamation is criticism that is groundless. I believe that any thinking person can articulate the grounds here by the timeline of the lawsuit relative to the purchase of the Hawthorne clinic. Truth is always a defense in defamation complaints.

      Delete
    2. Forget about the current lawsuit. Dr. Colasante claimed that the new owner benefited from buying the clinic and declaring bankruptcy soon after. Dr. Colasante suggested the the new owner concealed assets.

      With regards to the lawsuit, Dr. Colasante has claimed that the whistle-blower suit was the ultimate goal of the new owner. Both claims are certainly actionable. It would be ironic if Dr. Colasante prevailed in this lawsuit only to be sued for defamation. Over the last couple of weeks, I've read all the posts and comments and Dr. Colasante certainly has claimed wrong-doing in the bankruptcy.

      Delete
  2. Defamation lawsuits require proof of a) harm and b) untruth. Where is either?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was just making the point that you are messing without someone that is demonstrably litigious. If you claimed in a public forum that someone has concealed assets in a bankruptcy and couldn't prove it, you might be vulnerable. As far as damages, I don't know, I don't know her. She can certainly make such a claim.

      Delete
  3. Pat bought a clinic that had assets. Pat bought a clinic that had a ten-year history of success. Pat did a year and a half of due diligence on the clinic prior to purchasing it, and requested every document possible if it related to money. She reviewed a few patient charts at my insistence (a confidentiality agreement was signed) when I wanted to explain how the clinic ensured proper documentation and coding, but she gave no indication of understanding or caring. She requested files so big we put them on zip drives--twenty thousand pages of billing records in one request, all for the purpose of making sure she was purchasing a "clean" business. Within a month after the sale, employees called to tell me that Pat showed no interest in how the clinic functioned, and instead hired "billing specialists" to help collect money. She was overheard on the phone asking a senator in Tallahassee "how to report a doctor for fraud." Pat never asked me a single question about how the business operated, nor could she answer a single question I asked her about billing and coding procedures. Nursing staff reported to me that she knew very little about the clinical practice of medicine and in fact put a patient in dire risk when she intervened once by ordering a nurse to give a patient DepoMedrol IV (it is not an IV medication). (The patient subsequently called me at home to say she wanted to sue for this malpractice, and asked for my opinion). I was prepared to teach Pat whatever she needed to know to understand documentation, coding and billing, or the procedures that made the practice so valuable to patients, and I hired a medical director three months prior to the sale, so she would have a physician who understood the philosophy of the practice, could oversee NPs, PAs and other medical staff, loved seeing patients, and would make medical decisions. Pat fired him promptly, then set vigorously to work, according to key staff who observed her from within, collecting all the unpaid insurance claims she could (the same ones, apparently, she alleged had been fraudulently billed). She ran the business poorly before closing it a year or so later, hiring and firing four or five different medical directors (some of whom were no more than figureheads, and were seen reading the newspaper during clinic hours)--and sometimes (this is illegal) were not even present during active clinic hours. I'm told she petitioned anyone she could for money, including local churches, "to help a rural clinic that's trying to take care of these poor patients"). She was not present in the clinic many days, since she commuted back and forth to her home in Kentucky for "long weekends," and took several weeks' vacation in France shortly after she purchased the clinic. (This is not typical of someone who has a vested interest in the success of a new business, especially an active medical clinic.) She stopped paying bills for supplies, utilities, equipment she had bought on credit, even staff salaries (they reported her to the labor board and marched outside the clinic to demand paychecks, and refused to take my phone calls when I offered to help. She applied for loans. A year later most of the staff were gone, many of the original services were not available, patients defected, and a few months later, Pat closed the clinic. She filed bankruptcy for around 12 million dollars, and was granted bankruptcy relief. She is the whistleblower in my "criminal" and civil cases. If any of this seems like defamation, I'm sorry. It's not. But I take your point: a windfall from a defamation lawsuit is an attractive thing for some people, much easier than getting a job. After all, real work is hard. Why not look for alternatives?

    ReplyDelete