Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Discuss Penn State Whistleblower Defamation Case

Defamation is one way that companies and institutions retaliate against whistleblowers. When a corporation or an organization issues statements that could damage a person’s good reputation, that is defamation. The harm that can befall someone who has been defamed can range from moderate to severe and debilitating embarrassment and anxiety to economic damage, such as being unable to find work because their character has been so hurt that employers fail to see the truth of who they are and accurately assess their fitness for a particular position. Recently, a jury awarded over seven million dollars to a former Penn State assistant football coach after they found that the university had defamed him. The man had given testimony which helped prosecutors charge Jerry Sandusky with child molestation.

The former assistant coach claimed that the president of the university released a defamatory statement against him on the day that Sandusky was charged with child molestation. The harm continued as he incurred economic damages in connection with being removed from his job and other damages as the retaliation continued and as school administrators misled him by promising him that they would take appropriate action against Sandusky after he voiced his concerns to them.

In response to the allegations of harm, counsel for the university claimed that it was public opinion and national media coverage that damaged the former assistant coach’s reputation and not any action by the university. Counsel for the university also claimed that it was the former assistant coach’s lack of contacts within the coaching profession and lack of a national reputation that stood in the way of him finding alternate employment. It is not difficult to see that regardless of whether the former assistant coach had contacts within the profession and a national reputation that those resources might not have helped him much in finding a new job after the defamatory statement against him by the university was published all over the place by the national news media.

Barrett Law PLLC:  Protecting the Rights of Mississippi Whistleblowers 

Whistleblowers are essential to keeping companies and institutions honest. If people do not take the risk and come forward when their employer is doing something wrong, the wrong will likely continue, undiscovered, and people could be harmed. If you feel as though you experienced unfair treatment at the hands of your employer or former employer after you exposed violations of the law, you might be able to recover damages through the whistleblower claims process. If defamation of your character was a part of the retaliatory actions that your employer took against you, it is possible that you could recover for that harm, too. The Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC can help you navigate the whistleblower claims process with the aim of obtaining financial recovery for any losses and damages that you may have experienced as a result of your actions.  If you have questions about a whistleblower case, please call the Mississippi Whistleblower attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to arrange a free, initial consultation.

/by

Mississippi Whistleblower Attorney Talks about SEC Whistleblower Retaliation Case against Gaming Company

A lottery and gaming company must pay half a million dollars in penalties after terminating an employee who reported to senior management and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that he felt that the company’s financial statements might be distorted. The employee had had several years’ worth of positive performance reviews. An investigation into his termination revealed that he was removed from significant work assignments shortly after he raised concerns about the company’s cost accounting model. He was eventually fired from all of his job responsibilities three months later.

The gaming company conducted its own investigation into the accuracy of the company’s financial records, which the employee did not have any responsibility for overseeing. The company says that the investigation exposed no inaccuracies in its financial records. The SEC’s investigation into the matter resulted in the first case against a company where there was no actual underlying securities violation, as well as the aforementioned half million dollar fine. It is also only the second case that has been brought against a company for retaliating against a whistleblower since 2010 when the Dodd-Frank Act first authorized the SEC to bring these kinds of charges. Whistleblower protection cases like this one are just one aspect of what the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act seeks to accomplish. The overall purpose of the law is to place significant regulations on the financial industry to address concerns about the economy that developed during the recent economic recession. Dodd-Frank also aims to protect consumers by making rules that protect borrowers from abusive lending and mortgage practices by banks.

The company has agreed to pay the half million dollar penalty, and it has agreed to refrain from treating whistleblowers in a similar manner in the future. However, the company did not admit or deny the SEC’s findings. The SEC made a statement regarding the case, saying that strong enforcement of anti-retaliation protections for whistleblowers is essential for the continued success of the SEC’s whistleblower program. In this situation, an employee noticed something that he felt could lead to inaccurate financial reporting violations of the law. The employee was then wrongfully targeted for doing the right thing by reporting it. The SEC further stated that bringing retaliation cases like this one shows that ensuring a safe environment for whistleblowers is a top priority.

Barrett Law PLLC:  Defending Whistleblowers throughout Mississippi

If you have discussed concerns about potential violations of the law with senior management in your company and with authorities after receiving no response or an inadequate response from your employer, you might qualify for protection as a whistleblower. If you have experienced retaliation or “discipline” because of your actions, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC can help you.  We understand the ins and outs of the whistleblower lawsuit process, and we will help you pursue justice in your case. To learn more, please call the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule a free, initial consultation.

/by

Mississippi Whistleblower Attorney Discusses Wisconsin Social Security Whistleblower Case

A legal assistant for the Social Security Administration (SSA) says that he lost his job after he dutifully followed the federal code of ethics which requires government employees like himself to disclose any fraud, corruption, waste, or, abuse to authorities. Another woman, who had held a management position at the SSA, has been removed from that position and placed on administrative leave after alleging that corruption and cover-ups were taking place at the Madison, Wisconsin ODAR facility. A third woman, who had been working as a  legal assistant at the same facility, has testified in an office sexual harassment investigation that she has been denied reasonable accommodations for her ongoing health concerns that are related to workplace stress. These are just three of the employees at the Madison, Wisconsin ODAR facility who have been disciplined in one way or another after exposing fraud, waste, and abuse within the Social Security Administration. This discipline, which amounts to defiance of the Congressional mandate, is continuing to occur despite the fact that it obviously violates the provisions of whistleblower protection legislation.

Federal employees have a right to provide information to Congress, and they are obligated by a federal code of ethics to disclose inappropriate activities that they see to authorities. Federal employees are also protected by the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act, which was signed into law by President Obama back in 2012. The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is supposed to provide support to whistleblowers who are encountering inappropriate responses from their employers. Unfortunately, whistleblowers from the SSA have not had much luck in getting that help, and they claim that the OSC has not answered the questions that they have approached them with and that they have not been treated kindly by OSC personnel.

The SSA’s Office of the Inspector General is supposedly investigating a situation at the Madison ODAR facility involving an administrative law judge who is accused of sexually harassing employees, among other things. However, the SSA is said to have repeatedly ignored requests for information by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

This rash of problems for whistleblower within the SSA is, unfortunately, not a new issue. In 2003, the  SSA refused to comply with repeated demands from Congress regarding an audit involving evidence destruction and case delays. The SSA did eventually comply by providing the incriminating report, but those events did nothing to build Congress’s trust in the SSA.

Barrett Law PLLC:  Protecting Mississippi Whistleblowers

If you witnessed violations of federal law in your workplace, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorney at Barrett Law PLLC could help you file a whistleblower lawsuit.  Our experienced attorneys understand the complexities of whistleblower lawsuits, including those that are related to federal employees. Our attorneys can help you understand the whistleblower case process and pursue resolution of your whistleblower protection matter.  Call the experienced whistleblower protection attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule a free, initial consultation.

/by

Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Discuss Failed Clean Coal Project

An non-operational power plant that was supposed to serve as an example of how to produce clean energy from coal while at the same time turning a profit is failing to fulfill either of those objectives. There were big hopes for the Kemper coal plant, which was a major piece of Obama’s plan to slow the effects of global warming and a project that was supposed to bring thousands of jobs to the poorest state in America.

Not only is the plant non-operational, well behind schedule, and over budget, it is also under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Concerns about mismanagement are among the project’s many problems, problems that are now public knowledge thanks to the efforts of a whistleblower named Brett Wingo, who provided the New York Times with access to thousands of pages of public records, undisclosed internal documents, emails, and secretly but legally recorded conversations among his colleagues at the plant.

The New York Times reviewed the materials that Wingo had provided to them, and the overall picture that emerged from the review is that the plant’s owners grossly understated the project’s cost, underestimated its timetable, and had a practice of attempting to conceal problems as they emerged. Brett Wingo had seen all of this happening from his position inside of the project, and he felt a need to speak up and expose the mismanagement and fraud that was going on. As is the case with many whistleblowers, Brett Wingo lost his job after disclosing the information regarding the extensive project management issues with the Kemper coal plant project. An investigation into his termination by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration let to a statement by the Administration that he had been fired illegally.

The New York Times review of the documentation from the Kemper coal plant project revealed how a monopoly utility with strong political backing from both state and federal government officials got investors and ratepayers to pay the hefty price tag on one of the most costly power plants ever built. Because of this project’s high cost and poor outcome, the Environmental Protection Agency is likely to revisit its proposed rules on new power plants. The problems with the project are also likely to affect discussions about the best methods for slowing climate change.

Barrett Law PLLC:  Unwavering Support for Mississippi Whistleblowers 

If you feel as though you were treated unfairly by your employer or former employer after you exposed violations of Federal law, you may be able to recover damages through the whistleblower claims process. The Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC could help you navigate the entire whistleblower claims process with the goal of obtaining financial recovery for any losses and damages that you may have experienced as a result of your heroic actions.  If you have questions about whistleblower protection, please call the Mississippi Whistleblower attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule a free, initial consultation.

/by

Mississippi Whistleblower Attorney Explains the Sealing of False Claims Act Complaints

When a whistleblower complaint gets filed under the False Claims Act, the United States Department of Justice needs time to investigate the allegations of fraud. The government’s interest in the secrecy of the complaints is so crucial that the defendants in these types of claims are not even served with the complaints until the cases are unsealed. For this reason, whistleblower complaints that are filed under the False Claims Act are filed under seal and must remain under seal for sixty or more days.

Sometimes, though, information gets out despite the sealed status of a case. In the highly publicized False Claims Act case against State Farm, the attorney who represented the homeowners sent documents from the case to journalists from a variety of high profile media outlets while the case was still under seal. The whistleblowers, in that case, the Rigsby sisters, did win a bellwether verdict in federal court in Mississippi when a jury found that State Farm had submitted a false flood claim to the United States government.

State Farm appealed the decision and presented an argument to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the case should have been dismissed because the seal order on the case had been violated. The 5th Circuit denied the appeal and refused to set a standard that seal violations would automatically result in dismissal of the case. Instead of automatic dismissal, the 5th Circuit adopted a balancing test from a 1995 case in the 9th Circuit, U.S. v. Lujan. When the court applied the Lujan test to the State Farm case, they arrived at the result that the Rigsbys’ suit should not have been dismissed because the whistleblowers themselves did not violate the seal order in bad faith. The court said that it was their lawyer who violated the order, and it would be unfair to impute that mistake to them.

The case and the issue of seal violations are before the Supreme Court, and State Farm filed its merits brief on July 29. State Farm’s argument is that False Claims Act complaints are not supposed to serve as litigation bargaining chips, and they could become just that if there is not severe punishment for private whistleblowers who go public with their allegations. The case is still before the Court, and many different interest groups are interested in seeing what the Court will say about the matter in its decision.

Barrett Law PLLC:  Protecting the Rights of Mississippi Whistleblowers

If you have witnessed violations of federal law by a business, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC are here to help you file a whistleblower lawsuit.  Our experienced attorneys are skilled at navigating all of the complexities of whistleblower lawsuits, including the SEC whistleblower program. We can help you understand the whistleblower case process and pursue resolution of your whistleblower case.  Call the dedicated and knowledgeable whistleblower attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule a free, initial consultation.

/by

Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Talk about Job Loss after Going Public with Information

A young professional is out of a job after he informed the public that there are lead joints in Jackson’s water distribution system. The man was working for the Jackson Public Works Department as an engineer-in-training was working on a water main replacement job when he discovered a band of shiny, corroded lead connecting two pipes. He was surprised to find lead in the city’s water pipe system, and he showed people at a local newspaper what he had found. The newspaper reported the man’s findings, making them public knowledge.

Before the incident involving the lead on the pipes, the young man was working diligently for the city, doing things like inspecting newly installed water lines and preparing contract documents. He had recently taken on the task of managing the city’s storm water permits, and he was even expecting a promotion. Unfortunately, the city fired him shortly after he disclosed to the public that he had found lead in the water distribution system. The man wants to continue working for the city, and he will appear before the city’s personnel board to ask to return to his previous position.

The attorney who represents the young man feels as though his client got fired for speaking to the media – for engaging in his Constitutionally protected right to free speech. The city is concerned the man’s conduct in sharing his findings with the newspaper may cast the city in a false light and damage its reputation.

As is the case with many whistleblower situations, the man approached his superiors and informed them of the situation before he went public with any information. His supervisors discouraged him from approaching the city council about the issue and they warned him not to talk to the press. The response from his supervisors left the man feeling like he was being asked to withhold the information, and that did not sit well with him because lead in water is a serious public health issue. In fact, lead in water is a serious public health problem in Jackson because testing had previously revealed high levels of lead in water samples collected in homes throughout the city. The city maintained that plumbing within the individual homes was the likely source of the contamination and made no mention that the lead could be coming from the city’s water distribution pipes.

Barrett Law PLLC:  Helping Whistleblowers Expose Wrongdoing throughout Mississippi

Cities and towns provide essential resources to their residents. Infrastructures like water and sewer systems serve city residents, and while most of the time there is nothing but benefit flowing to the residents from the use of the infrastructure, there are situations in which damage or disrepair to the infrastructure can put the public’s health at risk. Fortunately, once someone sees a potential hazard, it can then be made known to the city so that they can take steps to address the issue. However, cities and towns are not always willing to address issues right away, and sometimes the only way to ensure that they address the issue is to notify the public. If you have disclosed information to the public about a problem with a city or a town, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC are here to help you.  We understand the complexities of the whistleblower lawsuit process, and we will help you pursue a just result. If you have questions about whistleblower lawsuits, please call the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free, initial consultation.

/by

Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys Talk about Threats to Severance

In a first-of-its-kind decision, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) challenged the validity of a severance agreement clause that companies have used to prevent employees from collecting severance pay in situations where the employees notified Federal agencies of rule violations at their former employers’ firms as the employees were leaving those businesses. As the result of that decision, Atlanta building supply company BlueLinx Holdings will pay a fine for attempting to prevent departing employees from blowing the whistle on violations as they departed from employment with the enterprise.

In 2013, BlueLinx started requiring workers who were leaving the company to sign severance agreements in which they promised to waive their rights to any awards that they might win if they were to bring a federal whistleblower case and prevail. Theoretically, the employees who signed the agreements were still free to report violations, but the forfeiture of any award that would come from a victory against the company would discourage employees from reporting. Employees did not have a meaningful choice about whether or not to sign the agreements because any employee who did not sign it would not receive severance pay or other benefits.

The SEC ruled that since the severance agreement requirement was designed to prevent former employees from blowing the whistle on their former employers, it was not valid because it violates the purpose of the SEC whistleblower program. The case involving BlueLinx does not involve any would-be whistleblowers but is instead based solely upon the existence of the severance agreement policy. The company claims that it never intended to discourage whistleblower lawsuits, but the existence of the severance agreement policy would certainly deter such suits regardless of the intent behind the policy’s existence.

To make the situation right, BlueLinx will pay a penalty of $265,00.00 and, perhaps even more importantly, discontinue use of the old severance agreement. A new severance agreement has been adopted that contains language that indicates that the former employee may not sue the company but that they may file whistleblower complaints with government agencies.

Reddy said the company has since re-tooled language in the severance agreement to make clear that employees agree not to sue the company, not foregoing compensation that may flow from whistleblower complaints to government agencies. What’s more, former employees who signed the old severance agreements within the past five years will not have to forfeit any awards that may come to them if they disclose possible violations to the SEC.

Barrett Law PLLC:  Supporting Mississippi Whistleblowers 

If you feel as though you were not treated fairly by your employer or former employer after you exposed violations of Federal law, the Mississippi Whistleblower Attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC are here to help you.  We will support you throughout the entire whistleblower claims process and help you pursue financial recovery for any losses and damages that you have experienced as a result of your actions.  Please call the Mississippi Whistleblower attorneys at Barrett Law PLLC today at 1 (601) 790-1505 to schedule your free, initial consultation.

/by

Mississippi Qui Tam Attorneys Note SEC Award of $17 Million to Whistleblower

An anonymous whistleblower has received an award of $17 million from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in what amounts to the second largest reward ever from the agency.  The whistleblower provided details that led to the recovery of a substantial sum related to securities fraud.  Details regarding the whistleblower case are limited because the SEC does not disclose specifics regarding its enforcement actions or investigations.  The agency protects the identity of the whistleblower by preventing disclosure of information that directly or indirectly could expose the whistleblower’s identity.  However, the amount recovered in the SEC enforcement action can be estimated at between almost $56 and $170 million based on the whistleblower’s award.

The chief of the SEC Office of the Whistleblower recently announced that during the one month period before the $17 million award, the agency had provided more than $26 million among five separate whistleblowers.  The SEC official indicated that he believes that these substantial rewards will motivate people who possess an awareness of federal securities violations to step forward and disclose illegal conduct to the SEC.

Most SEC whistleblower cases are initiated by company insiders such as financial advisors, investors, bookkeepers, tellers, bankers and others uniquely situated to discover conduct and schemes designed to defraud the government.  Whistleblowers who disclose SEC violations protect the government, taxpayers, and investors.  Eligibility for a reward is based on providing original information that facilitates the recovery of funds obtained by defrauding the government or securities violations.  The enforcement action must involve sanctions exceeding a million dollars.

The amount provided as a cash reward will amount to between ten and thirty percent depending on certain factors, which include the extent of the participation by the whistleblower and the nature of the information provided to the SEC.  The funds awarded to the whistleblower are paid from a fund established by Congress for the protection of investors.  Further, the reward does not involve any cost to taxpayers or investors who experience economic harm stemming from the securities violations.

A growing number of whistleblowers have come forward to report securities violations to the SEC in recent years, especially during the last five year period.  During 2015, the SEC received an all-time high 3,923 reports of illegal securities activity.  The total represented an eight percent increase over the previous year.  Approximately 37 million dollars were awarded among eight whistleblowers last year.  To put this amount of award money in perspective, the awards to whistleblowers in 2015 account for nearly seventy percent (68 percent) of the total amount paid by the SEC since the establishment of the SEC whistleblower program.

If you have information about a scheme or actions to defraud the government or securities violations that harm investors, you might be entitled to a substantial financial recovery if you blow the whistle.  At Barrett Law, we are here to help.  Contact our Mississippi Qui Tam Attorneys today at (601)790-1505 to schedule your free consultation, so we can answer any questions you may have regarding filing your claim.

 

/by

Mississippi Qui Tam Attorneys Discuss Complication in Determining Statute of Limitation for Whistleblower’s Termination

This blog previously has addressed protections for whistleblowers who are terminated for pursuing a qui tam claim or otherwise disclosing wrongdoing by their employer. However, many people do not understand the complex legal and procedural challenges to pursuing a qui tam action or a wrongful termination lawsuit related to disclosing employer false billings and/or schemes to defraud federal and state governments of public funds. Although some people attempt to navigate the whistleblower process without legal representation, there are procedural and timing deadlines that must be satisfied to avoid derailing your claim or forfeiting employee whistleblower protections.

While the statute of limitations might seem like a straightforward issue, whistleblowers can face challenges in determining the date by which a lawsuit must be filed when an employer retaliates. In Community Care Center of Aberdeen v. Barrentine, 160 So.3d 216 (2015), the Supreme Court of Mississippi considered whether a wrongful termination claim based on retribution for reporting abuse in a nursing home was subject to the statute of limitations for breach of contract or tort actions.

The plaintiff was the employee of a nursing home who filed a wrongful termination lawsuit more than a year after her discharge, which occurred shortly following her report to the state of suspected abuse of a patient. The nursing home sought to have the case dismissed based on the contention that the legal claim was barred by the one-year statute of limitations for breach of a written employment contract. The plaintiff contended that the appropriate statute of limitations was the three-year period applicable to torts based on the public policy exception.

In analyzing these competing statute of limitation arguments, the state’s highest court initially observed that the state recognized a narrow exception to the employment at will doctrine. Generally, this doctrine permits an employer to fire an employee for any reason or no reason at all. The Supreme Court of Mississippi noted that in a previous decision it ruled that “an employee shall not be barred by the common law rule of employment at will from bringing an action in tort for damages against an employer when the basis for the termination is a refusal by the employee to participate in illegal conduct.” (McArn v. Allied Bruce-Terminix Co., Inc., 626 So.2d 603 (Miss. 1993). In McArn, the employee alleged he was terminated for reporting to the Department of Agriculture that customers’ properties were not being treated properly with extermination chemicals. (Citations Omitted).

The Supreme Court of Mississippi considered the conflicting decisions from other states while acknowledging the issue had not been previously determined by Mississippi’s highest court. The court found two competing approaches in its prior decisions regarding the appropriate statute of limitations on employment-related claims. Decisions where the dispute concerned issues related to “traditional employer-employee situations,” such as non-payment of a benefit granted under the employment agreement, the one year statute of limitations was applied. However, the court observed that tort claims for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, such as retaliation against a whistleblower, have no relationship to the terms of the employment agreement. Therefore, the court reasoned that wrongful termination under these circumstances amounts to “an independent tort action” unconnected to the traditional employment agreement.

Based on this analysis, the employer’s motion for summary judgment was denied. This permitted the employee who disclosed illegal conduct by the nursing home that resulted in harm to the public to be protected from retribution from his or her employer. When you are considering a qui tam action to disclose wrongdoing by your employer, our Mississippi qui tam lawyers recognize that you will be concerned about your job and your employer’s ability to punish you for disclosing misconduct.

Because our law firm represents whistleblowers in actions under a range of statutes based on false, fraudulent, and illegal conduct committed against the federal government and the State of Mississippi, we can effectively represent clients in pursuing whistleblower actions and advise them regarding their right to protection from retaliation. If you have evidence of illegal activity or fraud by your employer, you are invited to contact the experienced Qui Tam Attorneys at Barrett Law to learn how we can help. Our Mississippi Whistleblower Lawyers have been representing conscientious employees throughout Mississippi for over 75 years. We offer personalized legal representation and zealous advocacy. We provide a free initial case evaluation so call us today at 662-834-2376. No Recovery No Fee!

 

 

/by

Whistleblower at Medical Device Company to Receive $51 Million for Disclosing Bribe & Kickback Scheme

Olympus Corp. of the Americas (OCA), which is the largest distributor of endoscopes in the country, has agreed to pay over $632 million to settle criminal and civil complaints stemming from the practice of disbursing kickbacks to hospitals and doctors. The scheme was designed to bribe medical providers to use the company’s endoscopes according to a press release from the Justice Department’s Criminal Division.

The civil part of the case stems from a lawsuit filed by the former compliance officer at OCA, John Slowik, pursuant to the False Claims Act at the federal level and in multiple states. Under the Federal False Claims Act, whistleblowers are authorized to initiate a lawsuit on behalf of the federal government and share in the financial recovery. The Department of Justice elected to intervene in the case and alleged that OCA engaged in a scheme violating the Anti-Kickback Statute, which forbids payment to doctors and hospitals that induce purchases paid for by federal health care programs like Medicare. The settlement includes an admission by OCA that it engaged in practices in violation of the statute, such as providing kickbacks that motivated the submission of false claims to Medicare and Medicaid. The medical supply distributor will pay $267.3 million to the federal government and $43.5 million to various states to resolve the civil portion of the legal action. The whistleblower will receive over $51 million for his role in disclosing the wrongdoing and bringing the legal action.

The settlement of the criminal portion of the suit will result in OCA agreeing to pay an additional $312.4 million in criminal penalties. The combined civil and criminal penalties amount the largest payout under the Anti-Kickback Statute and the most substantial amount paid by a medical device company in history. The subsidiary of OCA also has agreed to pay $22.8 million to settle criminal allegations under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in Latin America.

The criminal complaint alleged a number of specific practices that comprised the kickback/bribery scheme, which include the following:

  • Stalled a $50,000 research grant pending another medical facility’s decision to purchase OCA equipment
  • Physician in a key position at New York’s medical center being granted access to $400,000 OCA equipment for his private practice in exchange for influencing purchase of OCA equipment
  • Provision of a $5,000 grant to a hospital as an incentive to facilitate purchase of $750,000 in medical devices
  • Providing three physicians with a trip to Japan to reward the doctors for changing to OCA equipment

The Anti-Kickback Statute is designed to prevent improper relationships between medical device companies and health care providers that involve financial enticement to discount the patient’s medical needs and ignore lower cost alternatives. When such financial bribes encourage the use of overpriced medical equipment, the price of health care rises for all consumers. The recovery represents a substantial recoupment of public funds and a warning to medical equipment companies against such unethical and unlawful practices.

In addition to record financial penalties, OCA has agreed to the following conditions:

  • Implementation of a program requiring executives to forfeit up to three years of performance pay if they engage in similar misconduct.
  • Mandatory improvement of its compliance program and training
  • Board of Directors and CEO annually certifying the compliance program is functioning properly
  • Establishment of a confidential hotline for employees and patrons to report misconduct.

If you have become aware of fraud or other misconduct by your employer, our Mississippi Qui Tam Lawyer represents whistleblowers who disclose illegal and unethical conduct that depletes public funds. At Barrett Law, we are here to help. Contact our firm today at (601)790-1505 to schedule your free consultation, so we can answer any questions you may have regarding filing your claim.

 

/by