Posts

Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Discuss Notable Qui Tam Lawsuits

Whistleblowers have become a well-known concept to the general public thanks, in large part, to several famous Hollywood films.  A whistleblower is anyone who reveals misconduct on the part of a company or their employer.  The misconduct often involves fraud or corruption perpetuated for financial gain.  The U.S. government is a frequent victim of intentional fraud, costing taxpayers astronomical sums each year.

While the term whistleblower is well known, the lawsuits brought by whistleblowers, called Qui Tam actions, are less understood.  The origin of qui tam actions stems from The False Claims Act.  Created in 1863 by Abraham Lincoln, the False Claims Act is intended to punish persons or companies who defraud the U.S. government.  Within the law is a so-called “qui tam” condition that allows a private person to file suit on the government’s behalf.  The concept of qui tam itself dates back to 13th century England.

The False Claims Act offers whistleblowers a financial incentive intended to encourage them to step forward.  The whistleblower who successfully files the suit can receive between 15 and 30 percent of the money recovered by the federal government.  In 1986, the False Claims Act was strengthened to provide additional whistleblower rights out of concern for rampant fraud in the military contracting industry.  Since this time, the number of whistleblower actions filed each year has risen dramatically.

            The following is a look at a few high-profile whistleblower cases:

  1. Pfizer, Inc: In this famous 2009 case, a sales representative for Pfizer, John Kopchinski, filed a qui tam suit against his employer for engaging in fraudulent marketing practices with Bextra.  The suit alleged that Pfizer violated the federal laws banning kickbacks by reimbursing Bextra through both state and federal government programs, including Medicaid and Medicare.  Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer plead guilty and paid fines in excess of $2.3 billion.  This was the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the U.S.  Pfizer also paid $1.195 billion in the qui tam action, making it the largest civil settlement against a pharmaceutical company.  Kopchinski and six others split $102 million.
  2. Northrop Grumman: Northrop Grumman is a large aerospace and defense technology company.  Whistleblower Robert Ferro filed a qui tam suit against this company, charging it with selling faulty electronic equipment for use with military satellites.  The $325 million settlement that resulted is the biggest settlement paid by a defense contractor in this sort of suit.  Ferro received over $48 million for his actions in whistleblowing.
  3. Quest Diagnostics: In this sizable case, Quest Diagnostics, a giant medical lab company, paid a $302 million settlement, representing the largest amount paid by a medical lab company for a faulty product.  The qui tam case was filed by a California biochemist.  He asserted that Quest’s subsidiary, Nichols Institute Diagnostics Inc., was selling faulty blood kits to medical testing companies and hid the evidence that the kits were inaccurate.  This whistleblower was awarded 18 percent of the massive $253 million settlement.

Barrett Law PLLC: Experienced Representation for Qui Tam Whistleblower Actions

Qui tam lawsuits allow the courts to correct and put a stop to fraudulent activity, while also providing whistleblowers with financial compensation for their brave efforts in coming forward.  Across three generations and for over 75 years, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC have guided whistleblowers through the filing and pursuit of qui tam actions.  We have the skill, experience, and dedication to zealously pursue your qui tam case.  Barrett Law PLLC offers a free consultation to all new clients and operates on a contingency fee basis.  For excellence of legal services unmatched across the state of Mississippi, call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (800) 707-9577 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

The Whistleblowers Who Tried to Lift the Veil Before Snowden

Though Edward Snowden is the individual best known for leaking government documents that expose possible unconstitutional activity, a host of whistleblowers before him also struggled to lift the veil on questionable government activities.  Bill Benney is one such individual.  Binney worked at the National Security Agency (NSA) for nearly three decades as a leading crypto-mathematician.  He later became one of its leading whistleblowers.

Binney, who is now 70 and on crutches after losing a leg to diabetes, can still vividly recall the July morning seven years ago when over a dozen armed FBI agents burst through his front door as he was coming out of the shower.

The NSA is an agency overseen by Congress, the courts, and other governmental departments, along with its own workers.  In the past dozen years, whistleblowers like Binney have not had an easy time exposing misconduct.  Those early whistleblowers that attempted to work within the system state that Edward Snowden learned from their harsh experience.

Binney’s decision to go from NSA employee to whistleblower came shortly after September 11, 2011, when he uncovered the NSA had begun using a software he created to gather information about unwitting Americans without a court order.  In his belief, this act amounted to treason as it subverted the U.S. Constitution.

Binney and two other NSA employees who also later resigned from the agency first attempted to raise the issue with congressional committees.  However, because they lacked the documents to prove their charges, no one believed them.  Snowden did not repeat that mistake.  He seemed to recognize right away, perhaps after watching Binney and the others fail, that you need to provide documentation.  This is why Snowden had such an impact, where others that tried to work within the system failed to.

For instance, computer expert Thomas Drake blew the whistle on what he considered to be unconstitutional NSA programs.  Instead of resulting in investigations into the NSA—Drake found himself under prosecution.  Drake, who had taken his concerns to both the NSA and Congress, eventually showed unclassified information from the NSA to a reporter when no action was taken internally.  His home was raided and he was charged with violating the Espionage Act.  Drake ended up negotiating a misdemeanor plea after the government’s case fell apart and now works at an Apple store.  Drake too believes Snowden learned from his plight.

George Ellard, the NSA’s inspector general, has told the public that Snowden could have properly raised his concerns and Ellard would have offered him protection.  Snowden claims he did try to blow the whistle internally at the NSA, but Ellard never heard from him.

Since Snowden, Binney, and Drake’s attempts at whistleblowing, the rules for whistleblowers have changed.  President Obama issued a directive intended to provide greater protections for whistleblowers working for intelligence agencies, since they are not afforded the same protections as other federal employees.  Employees who raise concerns while employed, like Drake, will have a chance to appeal to inspectors generals at other intelligence agencies. Former employees, like Binney, are not afforded the same protections.

Bill Binney offers some important advice for anyone considering whistleblowing—the first thing you must do is get a lawyer.

Barrett Law PLLC: Providing Experience and Dedicated Representation to Brave Mississippi Whistleblowers

The Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC believe whistleblowers like Bill Benney and so many others within both federal and state agencies serve a vital function to the American public.  These courageous whistleblowers risk their jobs and livelihood to expose illegal activities that affect us all.  For over 75 years, our Mississippi qui tam attorneys have assisted whistleblowers in exposing fraudulent conduct.  We also protect whistleblowers who have experienced any sort of retaliation for their actions.  Call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (800) 707-9577 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

Retaliation & Whistleblowing in Mississippi: FAQs

An employee who acts as a whistleblower and reports the unlawful conduct of an employer or co-worker may experience some form of retaliation.  Those caught in this situation may be confused, unclear as to their rights, and feeling trapped.  Under Federal and Mississippi law, employees who report unlawful conduct are protected from retaliation by their employer or co-worker.  You do have recourse if you have experienced negative repercussions at work due to your whistleblowing report.

The following is a list of questions frequently asked by whistleblowers in Mississippi concerning retaliation and their rights against it:

What protection do I have against retaliation by an employer?

Employees are protected from retaliation by employers for asserting protected rights. In a retaliation claim, the employer generally takes some negative action against the employee due to their assertion of their protected right.  The retaliation can come in the form of:

  • Suspension
  • Demotion
  • Harassment or intimidation
  • Termination of employment
  • Other threatening behavior

To win a retaliation suit, an employee must prove they engaged in a protected conduct; their employer took adverse action against them; and the employer took such adverse action because they engaged in protected conduct.

What conduct is protected?

In order to be protected, the conduct must be such that a federal or state law prohibits retaliation for engaging in it or the court finds retaliation against the conduct jeopardizes public policy.  Some examples of protected conduct would include complaints about the conditions or terms of employment, as this is covered under the National Labor Relations Act.

If I report conduct that I believe is unlawful but it turns out to be lawful, am I still protected against retaliation?

So long as the report was made in good faith, yes.  You will receive the same protection from retaliation as you would have if the conduct turned out to be illegal.  It should also be noted that protection extends to former employees.  Therefore, if you file a complaint but later leave the job and your employer provides unfavorable references due to your previous complaint, this is actionable retaliation.

How close in time must the retaliation be?

Time is often the most important evidence between whistleblowing and reprisal.  Since you must establish the employer took the negative action due to your whistleblowing, an adverse event that takes place shortly after the protected conduct will be easier to prove.  However, this does not mean actions that take place months later will be dismissed.  Sometimes, an earlier, minor action against the employee can provide evidence to link the later, more dramatic reprisal.  A skilled whistleblower attorney will assist you in analyzing the timing and strength of your potential case.

What are the remedies for retaliation?

The exact remedies available if you are successful in your suit will vary depending upon your jurisdiction and the law which your employer violated.  However, some possible remedies include:

  • Reinstatement
  • Back pay
  • Liquidated damages (double your back pay)
  • Front pay (future wages)
  • Punitive damages
  • Attorney’s fees

Your attorney will discuss the precise remedies available to you after review of your case.

Barrett Law PLLC: Protecting Mississippi’s Brave Whistleblowers   

For over 75 years, across three generations, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC have provided skilled, zealous, and intelligent representation for courageous Mississippi whistleblowers.  We believe that whistleblowers serve a vital function in our society, exposing waste of government resources and fraudulent conduct.  As such, we will strive zealously to assist you in exposing such harmful conduct.  Barrett Law, PLLC operates on a contingency fee basis and the first consultation is always free.  The attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC pride themselves on ensuring each and every client receives superior representation, with passion and zeal.  Call today at 1 (800) 707-9577 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

VA Chief Vows to Crackdown on Whistleblower Retaliation

Speaking at a national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in St. Louis, Missouri, the acting secretary of the embroiled Department of Veterans Affairs vowed to end whistleblower retaliation.  This promise comes shortly after a private government watchdog agency released a report documenting and criticizing the VA’s negative treatment of employees who brought internal problems to light.

During the July 22, speech, Sloan Gibson pledged that the VA would do more to listen to workers who report problems.  Gibson, a former bank executive, took over the VA in late May after Eric Shinseki resigned amid controversy concerning treatment delays and falsified records occurring at VA hospitals nationwide.  The alarming reports included allegations that dozens of patients died awaiting treatment.

The Jackson, Mississippi VA hospital, called the G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, was at the heart of much controversy.  Several whistleblowers reported poor patient care at this hospital, including reports by Dr. Phyllis Hollenbeck, Dr. Charles Sherwood, and five other employees.  These doctors and staff reported that at the Jackson VA patients received inadequate review of radiology findings, were provided with unlawful prescriptions for narcotics, treated with unsterile medical equipment, and provided with chemotherapy drugs that were created using non-compliant pharmacy equipment.  In addition to these alarming problems, the whistleblowers revealed persistent problems with under-staffing, excessive wait times, and care that occurred so slowly patients elected to leave the hospital.  There are still over 50 lodged whistleblower complaints at the Jackson VA facility awaiting review and action.

On Monday, July 21, the Project for Government Oversight revealed that it had received complaints from almost 800 current and former VA workers as to possible wrongdoing.  Gibson stated in his speech before the Veterans of Foreign Wars that as a former private sector leader, he learned the most important source for information and improvement is employees.  If the VA is to deliver a better outcome for patients, Gibson said, it cannot create an environment where employees are afraid to speak out against misconduct.  The current environment in which employees’ opinions and concerns are not welcomed or tolerated must change, according to Gibson.

While Gibson’s speech was well received and employees along with the public hope his promises ring true, most remain skeptical.  Gail Wilson, a Vietnam veteran from Oxford, Mississippi says that he will not be convinced until he sees tangible changes.  His last appointment at the Memphis VA office was canceled at the last minute, without notice.

Any whistleblower who believes they have experienced an act of retaliation should consult with a licensed attorney in their area as soon as possible.  As whistleblowers, you have the right to be protected from any sort of retaliation and can take action to correct your employer’s wrongdoing.

Barrett Law PLLC: Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Protecting Employee Rights

The Jackson, Mississippi VA hospital has received much criticism and several alarming reports as of late.  The brave whistleblowers who stepped forward to expose poor patient care, long wait times, understaffing, and dangerous misdiagnoses are legally entitled to protection from any sort of retaliation.  Despite federal and state protections, some of these whistleblowers have experienced retaliation in the form of firings, being passed by for promotions, ill treatment, and more.  The Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC vow to protect courageous VA hospital whistleblowers who strive to make the hospital a better place for patients.  For over 75 years, we have assisted VA employees and hundreds of other employees in bringing to light fraudulent activities while protecting against any sort of mistreatment. For help with your potential whistleblower action, call Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (800) 707-9577 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

Letter from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel Reveals VA Downplayed Whistleblower Findings

Over the past few years, a number of whistleblowers have come forward with disturbing complaints concerning the G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center.  This VA hospital is located in Jackson, Mississippi, and treats thousands of veterans per year.  The whistleblower allegations raised serious questions about the hospital’s management system and ability to care for veterans.

A report from an independent federal agency criticized the Department of Veterans Affairs for not adequately responding to the information provided by whistleblowers which raises systematic concerns about patient care.  The report from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel reprimanded the VA for downplaying the severity of its problems at several facilities, including Jackson.

In a letter sent Monday, June 23, 2014, to the President from Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner stated that she remained concerned about the VA’s willingness to acknowledge and address the problems raised by whistleblowers.  She cited specifically to those brought to light in Jackson.  Here, numerous disclosures concerning patient care were made by Dr. Charles Sherwood, Dr. Phyllis Hollenbeck, and five other whistleblowers.  The VA substantiated alarming information, such as inadequate review of radiology findings, improper credentialing of providers, unlawful prescriptions for narcotics, unsterile medical equipment, and non-compliant pharmacy equipment used to create chemotherapy drugs.  In addition to these frightening problems, the whistleblowers revealed a persistent patient care problem of understaffing and excessive wait times, resulting in patients leaving the facility without ever having received care.

Complaints against the Jackson VA are certainly not new.  Several whistleblowers stepped out in 2009 to reveal concerns about improper sanitation and a lack of cleaning.  The VA vowed to take action after these allegations surfaced, but the number of whistleblowers have only increased since then.

According to Special Counsel Lerner, despite confirming each of these problems, the VA raised the defense of “harmless error”—asserting that these issues had no impact on patient care.  According to Lerner, this approach is preventing the VA from taking any real action to ensure veterans’ safety and health.

OSC recently closed investigations into the Jackson VA facility.  It still has over 50 pending cases of whistleblower disclosures from various VA employees.  In addition, Lerner’s, letter to the President came just two weeks after OSC stated it was investigating dozens of accusations of retaliation against VA whistleblowers.

Jackson VA officials have responded to Lerner’s letter by stating that they have embraced recommendations that came from OSC last summer and taken action to deal with identified problems. Officials state that the closing of the OSC report does not end its commitment to ensuring veterans obtain quality health care.

If you have information concerning unethical, illegal, or harmful practices occurring in your workplace, consult with a whistleblower attorney today to protect your rights.  Whistleblowers are protected against retaliatory action for raising complaints concerning the disruptive practices they see.  Further, qui tam lawsuits can result in the whistleblower receiving monetary compensation for their actions in coming forward to stop injustice.

Barrett Law PLLC: Protecting Mississippi’s Brave Whistleblowers

For over 75 years, across three generations, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC have provided skilled, zealous, and intelligent representation for courageous Mississippi whistleblowers.  We believe that whistleblowers serve a vital function in our society, exposing waste of government resources and fraudulent conduct.  As such, we will strive zealously to assist you in exposing such harmful conduct.  Barrett Law, PLLC operates on a contingency fee basis and the first consultation is always free.  The attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC pride themselves on ensuring each and every client receives superior representation, with passion and zeal.  Call today at 1 (800) 707-9577 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Report: Supreme Court Sides with Whistleblower in Retaliation Case

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued an important decision in a case involving whistleblowing and retaliation.  The case is titled Lane v. Franks, and involves a public employee who was fired from his job after testifying about corruption.  The facts of the case are as follows:

            Back in 2006, Edward Lane of Alabama worked as the director of Central Alabama Community College’s Community Intensive Training for Youth (CITY) program.  The program is a statewide one aimed at helping at-risk youth.  While employed in this position, Lane conducted an audit which uncovered that a state representative was on the program’s payroll, despite not conducting any work for the program.  Lane fired the representative, Susan Schmitz.  Shortly afterwards, Schmitz was indicted federally on charges of mail fraud and theft.

Lane testified, under subpoena, in an ensuing FBI case against the state representative. Meanwhile, the at-risk youth program run by Central Alabama Community College experienced budget shortfalls.  Lane and 29 other employees were fired in a claimed effort to manage financial difficulties.  Days later, however, Central Alabama Community College President Steve Franks rescinded all but two of the 29 terminations—those of Lane and one other employee.

The firing led Lane to file a suit against Franks, claiming that Franks violated Lane’s First Amendment protections.  Lane sought reinstatement and damages.  The two lower courts sided with Franks and the college, finding that Lane acted in an official capacity in firing Schmitz, and therefore could not claim the protections of the First Amendment.  Lane continued to fight, taking the matter all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In its ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed with the lower court and sided unanimously with Lane.  It clarified previous rulings in which the court held that public employees have free speech rights when acting as citizens, but not when testifying as to information they learned in their jobs or are required to speak due to their specific duties.  The Supreme Court found that Lane testified as a citizen on a matter of public concern.  Lane’s sworn testimony was cited as a quintessential example of citizen speech as Lane was under an obligation to tell the truth.

The Court’s opinion will add a new layer of complexity as to how whistleblowers are treated in the U.S.  The opinion, written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, stresses that citizens do not surrender their First Amendment rights by accepting public employment.  Rather, the rights of public employee’s to free speech must be balanced against the employer’s interests in promoting efficiency of the public services it performs.

The case of Lane v. Franks will have positive ramifications on public employees who act in a whistleblowing capacity for some time to come.  Traditionally, public employees have received the least whistleblower protections.  In recent years, however, the Court has continued to strengthen the free speech and other rights of public employees, who so often provide vital information concerning wrongdoing occurring in public agencies across the nation.

Barrett Law PLLC: Experienced Representation for Mississippi Whistleblowers   

For over 75 years, across three generations, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC have provided skilled, zealous, and intelligent representation for courageous Mississippi whistleblowers.  We believe that whistleblowers serve a vital function in our society, exposing waste of government resources and fraudulent conduct.  As such, we will strive zealously to assist you in exposing such harmful conduct.  Barrett Law, PLLC operates on a contingency fee basis and the first consultation is always free.  The skilled attorneys at Barrett Law, PLLC pride themselves on ensuring each and every client receives superior representation, with passion and zeal.  Call today at 1 (800) 707-9577 to schedule your free consultation.

/by

Whistleblowers Speak Out Against Alleged Wrongdoing at Veterans Hospital

Over the past few years, an alarming number of whistleblowers have filed disturbing complaints concerning the G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, located in Jackson, Mississippi.  The allegations raise serious questions about the hospital’s management practices and ability to care for veterans.  Due to the high number of complaints, their serious nature, and their likelihood of truth, congressional hearings are being held on the matter.

The problems brewing within the VA hospital were first brought to light in 2009 thanks to a whistleblower employee.   The Office of Special Counsel, in a letter sent to the Whitehouse last year, said that the initial 2009 report by a whistleblower alleged that the staff failed to properly sterilize and clean medical equipment that is routinely reused, such as scalpels and bone cutters.  The VA investigated the case and substantiated many of the allegations concerning a lack of adequate cleaning and sanitizing.  It vowed to take steps to correct the problem.

Less than two years later, however, a whistleblower employee named Gloria Kelley, who chose to identify herself, claimed the problems at the VA persisted.  Ms. Kelley worked in the Sterile Processing Department and stated that the incorrect procedures placed both employees and patients at risk.  Though her complaint was referred to the VA for investigation, they did not interview her.  The VA stated that it did not substantiate the allegations, but the Office of Special Counsel felt that the VA’s conclusion was unreasonable.

Since that time, many more whistleblowers, comprised of a diverse group of at least seven former and past employees, have made a variety of allegations concerning patient care. This past November, a congressional hearing was held wherein two whistleblowers described a shocking culture of negligence within the hospital system.

The hearing was held by the House Veterans Affairs’ Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations.  Two whistleblowers provided key testimony: Dr. Phyllis Hollenbeck, M.D., a former physician of family medicine at the facility, and Dr. Charles Sherwood, M.D., the former chief of ophthalmology at the VA hospital.  Both doctors had complained to the Office of Special Counsel concerning misdiagnoses, poor sterilization, understaffing, and other management practices that jeopardized patient safety.

Dr. Hollenbeck said that a high number of unsupervised nurse practitioners outnumbered the doctors by a ratio of three to one.  The lax attitude allowed these nurse practitioners to prescribe narcotics without physician oversight and absent the required Drug Enforcement Administration registration numbers.  This practice was in violation of numerous federal and state laws as well as the VA’s own regulations.  Hollenbeck said that veterans were frequently misdiagnosed due to the shortage of physicians and the frequency with which nurse practitioners did the job, causing them to suffer needlessly and, at times, die.

Dr. Sherwood, who worked at the VA for thirty one years, felt the VA’s performance based model for senior executive services has led to an emphasis on pay and job security, which comes at the expense of the safety of patients.  The performance based model has recently been scrutinized by congress.

Other evidence of a culture of neglect emerged during the hearing.  One poignant story concerned a patient who was also a VA employee.  This patient never saw a physician for over two years, despite repeated requests.  He was seen solely by nurse practitioners.  It took a cancer diagnosis and removal of his entire stomach to finally see a doctor, and then the doctor refused to provide him with leave from work, resulting in his termination from the VA.

The VA hospital has refused to comment on specific cases but has stated that it is reviewing the findings of the Office of Special Counsel and remains dedicated to its mission of providing high quality care to veterans.

Since 1936, Barrett Law PLLC has protected Mississippi’s brave whistleblowers in their quest to stop illegal and unethical behaviors. Under Whistleblower Protection Act, whistleblowers are protected from retaliation and can be rewarded for shedding light on unlawful practices.  To stop workplace injustice, call us today at 1 (800) 707-9577 to schedule a free initial consultation.

/by

Johnson and Johnson Settles Massive Lawsuits with Huge Payouts to Whistleblowers

Johnson & Johnson, one of the nation’s oldest and one of the world’s largest companies, has recently settled a massive series of lawsuits involving allegations that Johnson & Johnson, through two of its subsidiaries, engaged in marketing drugs for unapproved uses and giving kickbacks to physicians and nursing homes.  Johnson & Johnson will pay a total of $2.2 billion in damages and fines and damages in both civil and criminal cases.  Criminal fines amount to $485 million, and $1.72 billion will be allocated to civil settlements with both the federal government and several states.  The global settlement is one of the largest health care fraud settlements in the history of the United States.

Allegations against Janssen Pharmaceuticals, one of Johnson & Johnson’s subsidiaries, regarding Risperdal spanned a course of conduct over the years 1999 through 2005.  Johnson & Johnson, through its subsidiary, promoted the use of Risperal to treat specific individuals and conditions for which the drug had not been FDA-approved.  During the time period, Risperdal was approved for use only to treat schizophrenia.  However, Risperdal was improperly promoted for use treating behavioral problems in elderly dementia patients, including anxiety, agitation, and depression.  Its use with this population was promoted, despite Johnson & Johnson’s awareness that Risperdal posed increased health risks to elderly patients, including stroke.  It was also improperly promoted for use treating children suffering from conduct disorders, as well as in treating children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.  This, too, was despite Johnson & Johnson’s awareness that Risperdal posed an increased health risk to children, including risk of increased hormone levels.  Finally, Risperdal was improperly promoted for use in treating conduct disorders in individuals with development disabilities.  Allegations involving Risperdal also included that Johnson & Johnson, through Janssen, violated the federal Anti-Kickback statutes by making illegal payments to health care providers and long-term care pharmacy providers for promoting the aforesaid uses of Risperdal.

With regard to Invega, a drug approved only for treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder, allegations included that Johnson & Johnson, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, marketed it for off-label uses from 2006 through 2009.

The allegations also include that the company paid kickbacks to Omnicare, Inc., the largest pharmacy in the United States.  It specializes in dispensing drugs to nursing home patients.  The kickbacks were designed to induce Omnicare and its consultants to encourage the use of Risperdal by nursing home patients.

Other allegations include that Johnson & Johnson, through another of its subsidiaries—Scios, Inc.—cause false and fraudulent submission of claims to federal health care programs related to the drug Natrecor.  Natrecor is used to treat severe heart failure.  Johnson & Johnson, through Scios, Inc., marketed the drug for use with patients with less than severe heart failure, which use was not scientifically supported.

The civil settlement includes damages for violations of the federal False Claims Act related to Risperdal, Invega, and Natrecor.  Johnson & Johnson, through Janssen Pharmaceuticals, will pay $1.391 billion to resolve the False Claims Act allegations related to Risperdal and Invega and $184 million to resolve the False Claim Act allegations related to Natrecor.  The company will also pay $149 million to resolve the kickback allegations related to Omnicare, Inc.

The massive settlement includes damages for whistleblower in three states.  Whistleblowers in Pennsylvania will receive $112 million.  Whistleblowers in California will receive $28 million. And, whistleblowers in Massachusetts will receive nearly $28 million.

As part of the settlement, Johnson & Johnson’s subsidiary, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, has also agreed to plead guilty to two counts of introducing a misbranded drug, Risperdal, into commerce, which is a violation of the Food and Drug Act.

Barrett Law PLLC has a long history of representing individuals in whistleblower cases.  We have been advising clients as to their rights and helping them through all variety of whistleblowing matters for 75 years.  Barrett Law PLLC will be there to help you, too. Contact us today at (800) 707-9577 to schedule an initial consultation.

/by

New Concerns Raised About Staffing at G.V. Montgomery VAMC in Jackson, Mississippi

Over the span of the past several years, beginning in 2009, serious complaints about the management of G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center located in Jackson, Mississippi, have surfaced.  The issue boiled over earlier this year when, in March, the United States Office of Special Counsel sent a letter to the White House indicating that the Office of Special Counsel had found a pattern of problems at G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

The United States Office of Special Counsel is an independent federal agency responsible for receiving whistleblower complaints and prosecuting claims under the Whistleblower Protection Act.  It received the complaints in question.  The Office of Special Counsel conducted interviews and ultimately issued the letter to the White House mentioned above.  The complaints involved a wide array of issues, from improper sterilization practices, poor staffing, and missed diagnoses.  Furthermore, the complaints indicated that these issues occurred over a lengthy span of time—six years.

The first of the complaints, dating to 2009, involved allegations that the VAMC failed to properly sterilize equipment.  In 2011, another employee made allegations that sterilization workers were not following proper procedure, including wearing protective clothing.  In 2012, a primary care doctor made allegations that nurses were prescribing medications that they were not authorized to prescribe.  Dr. Phyllis Hollenbeck also complained that, because of inadequate physician staffing in the primary care unit, nurses were providing care that they were not licensed to provide.  Finally, in 2013, a retired ophthalmologist complained that a former radiologist at the VAMC regularly marked images as read when, in fact, they were not.

In response to the whistleblowers’ complaints and the letter from the Office of Special Counsel, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs opened an investigation.  The public disclosure of the details of the complaints by the Office of Special Counsel, which was highly unusual, also lead to an outcry by patients at the VAMC.   The VAMC and the Department of Veterans Affairs attempted to assuage concerns by holding open meeting with patients on April 3, 2013.

Earlier this year, Joe Battle, the director of G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center, hired a new assistant director, who started in May.  In June, Mr. Battle also issued statements indicating that he would be recruiting a new chief of staff and nurse director.  However, despite his attempts to remedy the problem, one of the key whistleblowers—Dr. Hollenbeck—indicated that the VAMC remains seriously understaffed.  Dr. Hollenbeck’s continued concerns also came amidst statements from Representative Jeff Miller of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs that G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center needing to be taking more aggressive action to remedy problems plaguing it.

Earlier this month, the Department of Veterans Affairs issued findings that G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center did not have adequate physician staffing in its primary care unit, leading to nurses being responsible for too many patients.  The findings also suggested that further investigation may be necessary.

Although it does not appear that the whistleblowers in this situation suffered retaliation by G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center for voicing their complaints, such is not always the case.  Unfortunately, whistleblowers often face retaliation, including termination, harassment, demotions, and the like.  There are federal laws preventing this type of retaliation if you are a federal employee.  Certain protections for private employees also exist in Mississippi.

If you are an employee and find yourself in a situation in which you have voiced or believe you need to voice complaints about practices by your employer and are facing retaliation or have concerns about potential retaliation, Barrett Law, PLLC can help you understand your rights and the protections to which you may be entitled.  We have a long history of protecting the rights of whistleblowers.  Contact us today at (800) 707-9577 to schedule an initial consultation.

/by

New Concerns Raised About Staffing at G.V. Montgomery VAMC in Jackson, Mississippi

Over the span of the past several years, beginning in 2009, serious complaints about the management of G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center located in Jackson, Mississippi, have surfaced.  The issue boiled over earlier this year when, in March, the United States Office of Special Counsel sent a letter to the White House indicating that the Office of Special Counsel had found a pattern of problems at G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

The United States Office of Special Counsel is an independent federal agency responsible for receiving whistleblower complaints and prosecuting claims under the Whistleblower Protection Act.  It received the complaints in question.  The Office of Special Counsel conducted interviews and ultimately issued the letter to the White House mentioned above.  The complaints involved a wide array of issues, from improper sterilization practices, poor staffing, and missed diagnoses.  Furthermore, the complaints indicated that these issues occurred over a lengthy span of time—six years.

The first of the complaints, dating to 2009, involved allegations that the VAMC failed to properly sterilize equipment.  In 2011, another employee made allegations that sterilization workers were not following proper procedure, including wearing protective clothing.  In 2012, a primary care doctor made allegations that nurses were prescribing medications that they were not authorized to prescribe.  Dr. Phyllis Hollenbeck also complained that, because of inadequate physician staffing in the primary care unit, nurses were providing care that they were not licensed to provide.  Finally, in 2013, a retired ophthalmologist complained that a former radiologist at the VAMC regularly marked images as read when, in fact, they were not.

In response to the whistleblowers’ complaints and the letter from the Office of Special Counsel, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs opened an investigation.  The public disclosure of the details of the complaints by the Office of Special Counsel, which was highly unusual, also lead to an outcry by patients at the VAMC.   The VAMC and the Department of Veterans Affairs attempted to assuage concerns by holding open meeting with patients on April 3, 2013.

Earlier this year, Joe Battle, the director of G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center, hired a new assistant director, who started in May.  In June, Mr. Battle also issued statements indicating that he would be recruiting a new chief of staff and nurse director.  However, despite his attempts to remedy the problem, one of the key whistleblowers—Dr. Hollenbeck—indicated that the VAMC remains seriously understaffed.  Dr. Hollenbeck’s continued concerns also came amidst statements from Representative Jeff Miller of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs that G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center needing to be taking more aggressive action to remedy problems plaguing it.

Earlier this month, the Department of Veterans Affairs issued findings that G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center did not have adequate physician staffing in its primary care unit, leading to nurses being responsible for too many patients.  The findings also suggested that further investigation may be necessary.

Although it does not appear that the whistleblowers in this situation suffered retaliation by G.V. Montgomery Veterans Affairs Medical Center for voicing their complaints, such is not always the case.  Unfortunately, whistleblowers often face retaliation, including termination, harassment, demotions, and the like.  There are federal laws preventing this type of retaliation if you are a federal employee.  Certain protections for private employees also exist in Mississippi.

If you are an employee and find yourself in a situation in which you have voiced or believe you need to voice complaints about practices by your employer and are facing retaliation or have concerns about potential retaliation, Barrett Law, PLLC can help you understand your rights and the protections to which you may be entitled.  We have a long history of protecting the rights of whistleblowers.  Contact us today at (800) 707-9577 to schedule an initial consultation.

/by