ILNews

AG encourages whistleblower lawsuits to fight fraud

August 19, 2010
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Attorney General’s Office wants health care and pharmaceutical industry workers to know that they have the ability to file lawsuits and get protection as whistleblowers, and that could mean getting a portion of any settlement or damages that results from the suit.

With Medicare and Medicaid fraud a multi-billion dollar problem nationally, the state’s highest attorney is reaching out to workers who may be impacted by these issues to alert them of their rights as whistleblowers in stopping this type of state and federal fraud.

Attorney General Greg Zoeller is trying to raise public awareness on the topic, which comes as the health care and pharmaceutical industries face sweeping reforms in the coming years and more people are exposed to these scenarios.

“The idea is to persuade workers already concerned about fraud to raise those claims under the False Claims Act,” Zoeller said. “If individuals on the inside are aware of fraud … and reporting it internally has not stopped the fraud, they may be reluctant to come forward for fear of being ostracized from future employment in their chosen profession. While we would hope people would report fraud because that’s the right thing to do, we understand that the potential of a substantial financial reward may be necessary to prompt insiders to come forward.”

The AG’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit is supervising the effort, which involves the False Claims Act that’s existed in federal and state law for years and applies to government contract work. A whistleblower action starts when someone like an employee files a private lawsuit against a provider or company, alleging that business committed fraud on a government contract. That employee-plaintiff basically brings the suit on the government’s behalf, the AG said. If the government wins at trial or reaches a monetary settlement with the provider or company where the fraud occurred, then that whistleblower may receive 15 to 30 percent of the proceeds.

During the past year, the state has been involved in a handful of these whistleblower actions that have alleged billions of dollars in fraud, according to the AG’s Office. Those include suits against Pfizer, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, and the South Bend mental health services facility called Madison Center. Some causes have been settled while others remain ongoing.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  3. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT