Search Results

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America, ex rel., Judith Robinson, and State of Indiana v. Healthnet Inc.
23–2728
Civil. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge James Sweeney. Affirms the district court’s holdings that it lacked jurisdiction over Count III of Dr. Judith Robinson’s amended complaint, on behalf of the United States and the State of Indiana, against HealthNet alleging violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and False Claims Act and the Indiana False Claims and Whistleblower Protection Act and that the settlement was fair, adequate, and reasonable. Finds that the district court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting Robinson’s challenges to the fairness of the settlement agreement. Also finds because that because Robinson has provided no other argument against the district court’s analysis or claimed shortcomings in the district court’s procedure, the circuit court finds the settlement agreement to be fair, adequate, and reasonable under the circumstances. Attorney for plaintiffs: Robert Saint, Lawrence Carcare,  Frances Barrow, Benjamin Jones. Attorneys for defendant: Libby Goodnight, Marc Quigley.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In re: Adoption of R.G.B. and P.K.B., M.B. v. A.S. and W.S.
24A-AD-1885
Adoption. Reverses Washington Circuit Court Judge Larry Medlock’s order granting the motion of adoptive parents’ A.S. and W.S. to waive the statutorily-mandated period of supervision prior to the adoption of minor children R.B. and P.B. Finds that the juvenile court erred in granting the waiver of the home study requirement. Remands with instructions for the juvenile court to order a period of supervision pursuant to Indiana Code section 31-19-8-1. Attorney for appellant: A. David Hutson. Attorney for appellee: Alice Blevins.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Poultry & Industrial Suppliers, Inc. v. Incubacol, S.A.S.
23A-CT-2446
Civil tort. Affirms Kosciusko Circuit Court Judge Michael Reed’s denial of Poultry & Industrial Suppliers’ motion for judgment on the pleadings on the strict-liability and negligence counts, but remands for further proceedings on the warranty count. Finds because Florida law applies to the strict-liability and negligence counts, the trial court did not err in denying Poultry Suppliers’ motion for judgment on the pleadings on the strict- liability and negligence counts, which was based on Indiana law. Also finds it’s unclear whether Poultry & Industrial Suppliers was an exclusive distributor for CTB and how CTB’s warranty got passed to Incubacol. Attorneys for appellant: Christopher King, William Ramsey. Attorney for appellee: Douglas Eaton.