Kickbacks- Fraud Always WrongPosted on March 1, 2017 in Uncategorized
An Arizona doctor, Walter Simmons is among 12 doctors, pharmacy owners and marketing pros accused of a fraud and kickback scheme that prosecutors allege involved a sham medical study used to bilk up to $102 million from the publicly-funded federal health program for military family members. This is sickening to those doctors who play by the rules.
Simmons worked at two Phoenix hospital chains and he was indicted in October in U.S. District Court in Dallas on one count of conspiracy to commit health-care fraud. The federal charge carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine.
Federal prosecutors said the fraud involved prescribing “compounded” drugs such as pain, scar and migraine creams to military families covered by Tricare, the federal health insurance program for active-duty and retired military and family members. “Ripping off the vulnerable and sick should always have the severest of penalties”… says, lawyer William A. Miller of Phoenix, Arizona.
There have been at least two other federal probes alleging fraud with pharmacies that paid kickbacks to crooked doctors. Any venture, that offers a kickback, is heading for a disaster. Fraud is fraud. At the law firm of William A. Miller, of Scottsdale, we have seen fraud cases of ‘under the table’ payments for: bringing investors to the table, putting a real estate deal together (no commission unless you have a license) and mortgage brokering. All wrong, all regulated by statutes and Arizona Department Rules and Regulations. We are currently in appeal that involved a bank officer who would funnel REO’s to his dad’s development company. Same old story. Fraud.
If you have questions about finder’s fees, commissions, kickbacks, conflicts of interest and/or the legality of such, give us a call at 602.319.6899. Our office is conveniently located in Scottsdale, Arizona off of the 101.
Arizona Statute of LimitationsPosted on February 8, 2017 in Arizona Law Regarding Business and Real Estate
Based on the advice of their CPA, an Arizona auto dealership ‘thought’ they reduced their tax liabilities through stock ownership plans devised by their CPA. Much later the IRS disapproved of these plans. The IRS sent past due tax demands to the owners. Eventually, the IRS settled the claims against the owners. The owners paid big bucks in fines and penalties. These owners then sued the CPA for negligence, breach of contract and other claims. The Maricopa County superior court judge concluded that the professional negligence claims accrued when the IRS issued its demand and those claims were barred by the statute of limitations.
The Arizona court of appeals reversed. It rejected a doctrine that the owner’s claims accrued upon the IRS’s demands. It also rejected a different concept that the claims accrued upon a final decision in the tax appeal. Instead, the Arizona court of appeals adopted a fact-based approach to claim accrual.
The Arizona court reasoned that the notice of deficiency did not necessarily commence the statute of limitations because continued consultation with an accountant after the notice of deficiency based on a reasonable belief of IRS error is legally inconsistent with requiring the commencement of a malpractice action regarding the same conduct.
Adopting a case-by-case or fact-based approach to claim accrual brings accounting malpractice claims in line with cases reviewing the statute of limitations for attorney malpractice.
Feel free to call Bill Miller from Scottsdale, Arizona at 602-319-6899 if you need help in an Arizona Court proceeding or you think the statute of limitations may have expired. His office is off the 101 in Scottsdale.
We also handle, Breach of contract, Non-compete agreements, Non-disclosure agreements, Employee theft and embezzlement, Insurance purchases and enforcement of policy coverage, Negotiation and/or enforcement of commercial leases, Negligence and gross negligence resulting in losses, Intentional acts causing a company to suffer damages, Tortious interference with contractual relationships, Unjust enrichment, Real Estate fraud, Consumer fraud, Conversion/Theft, Intentional and/or negligent misrepresentation, Business torts and Real estate title & escrow.
Arizona Register of Contractors =$$$Posted on January 3, 2017 in Uncategorized
You can get money from the Arizona Register of Contractors (ROC) in Arizona through their recovery fund. It’s a mini insurance policy for flakey contractors. In Ramsey v. Arizona Registrar of Contractors a homeowner sought recovery for subpar contracting. The ROC intervened and moved to dismiss the case against the Recovery Fund. It said, the homeowner had suffered no “actual damages” because the amount owed to complete the home was less than the amount owed to the contractor. The trial court ordered the ROC to pay the homeowner from the Fund. The appeals court remanded, agreeing with the ROC’s interpretation of “actual damages” as: (1) the reasonable cost of completing the contract and repairing the contractor’s defective performance; minus (2) the remaining unpaid contract price.
The appeals court reasoned that ROC’s interpretation restored claimants against the Fund to the same position they would have been in had the contract been performed by excluding contractor expenses that had never been paid.
Regarding the logic of the trial court, the appeals court said the statute governing payment from the fund requires only “testimony, documentary evidence, or other proof . . . as to those portions of the application to which the ROC has objected,” rather than a blanket statement of facts pursuant to Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c)(3).
Further, the appeals court held that the trial court was not required to hold a hearing prior to directing payment from the Fund, where the issue was legal and had been briefed by the lawyers.
At the Law Firm of William A. Miller, we have handled numerous contractor complaints over the years. The ROC waters are very rough and you should contact a lawyer before ‘jumping in’. Call Bill at 602-319-6899 to discuss.
A Good Win in 2016Posted on September 24, 2016 in Arizona Law Regarding Business Disputes
In August of 2016, 22 days before a jury trial I had litigated for 3 years, I knocked the heck out of a corporate entity I deemed an ‘alleged sham’ who had contractually interfered with our client and their prospective business opportunities. We focused on Antwerp Diamond Exch. of Am., Inc. v. Better Bus. Bureau…Read More
Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure = Truth FindingPosted on June 7, 2016 in Arizona Law Regarding Business and Real Estate
Prosecutors are in trouble after lawyers representing a doctor accused of fraud alleged the U.S. attorney’s office has been stealing documents. In court papers filed May 26, lawyers wrote prosecutors had gained access to discovery of the defense. According to the defense, an informant said an FBI agent had received CDs containing duplicates of discovery…Read More
Key dates in Arizona AppealsPosted on May 25, 2016 in Arizona Law Regarding Business and Real Estate
Civil cases are almost always complicated and require experienced lawyers. This goes from the initial intake, through discovery, to trial and to post judgment wrangling. For instance, in Arizona, a passenger injured while in a taxi sued the taxi company for damages related to the injuries. A Maricopa County jury awarded the passenger $700,000. Not…Read More
Arizona Law- Sometimes GracePosted on January 19, 2016 in Arizona Law Regarding Business and Real Estate
Hiatt_v._Shah In 2010 upset Arizona investors sued a video developer in Maricopa County Court. There ended up being three separate cases. The Judge appointed a receiver to handle this. Later, in a settlement agreement the receiver issued Receivership Certificates to Hiatt and Shah granting them powerful purchase rights on receivership assets. The developer was unable…Read More
Arbitration is Changing the GamePosted on November 2, 2015 in Arizona Law Regarding Business and Real Estate
Arbitration is changing the legal game. Be on your guard if you are faced with this. When Dr. Pierce accused her medical group of permitting sexual harassment she was forced to arbitrate in place of the filing a lawsuit. Presiding over the case was not a judge but a corporate lawyer, Mr. Kalogredis. When Dr….Read More
A Good Jury VerdictPosted on October 26, 2015 in Business Law
We recently represented a prestigious Phoenix doctor in a complex commercial jury trial. The Plaintiff was represented by the venerable law firm of Dickenson Wright. With law offices in many States and over 350 lawyers, these are the ‘big dogs’. Yet, at the end of the day we won and here is what the good…Read More
Tonto National Forest Services Rounding Up HorsesPosted on August 20, 2015 in Lawsuits in Arizona
Beautiful wild horses have roamed the Tonto National Forest near the Salt River in Arizona for hundreds of years. Recently, we were retained to stop the Forest Service from rounding up these horses. On July 31, 2015 the Tonto National Forest published a warning in an obscure publication that unauthorized horses in a portion of…Read More