ILNews

Pharmacy owner pleads guilty to $3.5M in Medicaid fraud

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A West Lafayette pharmacy owner was sentenced to four years and 9 months in federal prison for defrauding the state’s Medicaid program. He was also ordered to repay Medicaid and pay taxes owed.

Rossville resident Chad Shedron, 36, was sentenced by Chief Judge Philip Simon after pleading guilty to an information charging him with the felony offenses of executing a scheme to defraud the Indiana Medicaid health benefit program and evading federal income tax, according to a statement Thursday from the office of David Capp, U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Indiana.

The case is a result of an investigation that included an FBI-led raid in November of Shedron’s pharmacy, Family PharmaCare in the University Square Mall.
 
According to his plea, Shedron agreed to a money judgment in the amount of $3,521,961.22 – the amount of proceeds derived from the health care fraud.  He also agreed that the tax loss for 2007 was about $189,009, and further agreed that he is responsible for tax losses of $164,728 for 2008, $141,623 in 2009 and $32,310 in 2010, according to the statement.  

Shedron agreed to forfeit his home, $65,000 in cash, a brokerage account, jewelry and a baseball card collection with an estimated value of more than $200,000, according to Capp’s office.

Shedron will also serve one year of supervised release.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

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. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT