United States ex rel. Martin v. Life Care Ctrs. of Am., Inc.
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee |
| Writing for the Court | HARRY S. MATTICE, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE |
| Citation | United States ex rel. Martin v. Life Care Ctrs. of Am., Inc., 114 F.Supp.3d 549 (E.D. Tenn. 2014) |
| Decision Date | 29 September 2014 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 1:12–cv–64,Case No. 1:08–cv–251 |
| Parties | United States of America ex rel. Glenda Martin and State of Tennessee ex rel. Glenda Martin, Plaintiffs/Relator, v. Life Care Centers of America, Inc., Defendant. United States of America ex rel. Tammie Johnson Taylor, Plaintiff/Relator, v. Life Care Centers of America, Inc., Defendant. |
Melissa Handrigan, Sarah M. Arni, Shaun Pettigrew, Zach Williams, United States Department of Justice, Theodore L. Radway, United States Attorney's Office, Amy L. Easton, Andy J. Mao, Jonathan H. Gold, Washington, DC, Edwin G. Winstead, U.S. Department of Justice, Denver, CO, Elizabeth S. Tonkin aka Former AUSA, Jeremy Stephen Dykes, Jessica Sievert, Robert C. McConkey, III, US Department of Justice, Knoxville, TN, Giselle J. Joffre, United States Attorney's Office, Boston, MA, Jennifer Aldrich, U.S. Department of Justice, Columbia, SC, Jessica Elliott, Susan Torres, United States Attorney's Office, Mark Lavine, US Department of Justice, Miami, FL, Michael R. Kenneth, United States Attorney's Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiffs/Relator.
Daniel K. Winters, Reed Smith LLP, New York, NY, Eileen H. Rumfelt, Miller & Martin PLLC, Atlanta, GA, Don Howarth, Jennifer M. Rosen, Padraic J. Glaspy, Suzelle M. Smith, Howarth & Smith, Los Angeles, CA, Andrew C. Bernasconi, Eric L. Alexander, Kelly H. Hibbert, Lawrence S. Sher, Nancy E. Bonifant, Scot T. Hasselman, Thomas C. Fox, Reed Smith LLP, Washington, DC, Travis R. McDonough, Richard C. Rose, Roger W. Dickson, Kyle W. Eiselstein, Leah M. Gerbitz, Miller & Martin, PLLC, Chattanooga, TN, for Defendant.
Before the Court is Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 140). For the reasons stated hereafter, Defendant's Motion will be DENIED .
As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that Defendant is only seeking summary judgment as to the Government's use of statistical sampling for Counts I and II of its Consolidated Complaint in Intervention. See Doc. 152 at 7. Thus, the Court will not address the merits of the Government's identified false claims under the False Claims Act ("FCA") or its claims for unjust enrichment, payment by mistake, and conversion. Additionally, as Defendant is seeking a legal determination solely regarding the use of statistical sampling in cases brought under the FCA, the parties do not dispute the material facts relevant to this determination. The Court will provide a brief background of the allegations stated in the Complaint, and then address the merits of Defendant's arguments.
The Court summarized the procedural posture of this action as well as the allegations set forth in the Government's Complaint in its March 26, 2014 Order on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss:
Medicare, Medicaid, and TRICARE
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
United States v. Kindred Healthcare, Inc.
...living (‘ADL’) such as ‘bed mobility, toilet use, transfer from bed to chair, and eating.’ " United States v. Life Care Centers of America, Inc. , 114 F. Supp. 3d 549, 553 (E.D. Tenn. 2014) (quoting 63 Fed. Reg. 26,252 ).5 Skilled nursing facilities use a clinical assessment tool referred t......
-
United States ex rel. Wall v. Vista Hospice Care, Inc.
...such a request"). Some district courts have allowed extrapolation in similar circumstances. See United States v. Life Care Centers of Am., Inc., 114 F. Supp. 3d 549, 556 (E.D. Tenn. 2014); United States v. Robinson, 2015 WL 1479396, at *5-6 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 31, 2015); United States v. AseraCa......
-
United States ex rel. Sirls v. Kindred Healthcare, Inc., CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-683
...living ('ADL') such as 'bed mobility, toilet use, transfer from bed to chair, and eating.'" United States v. Life Care Centers of America, Inc., 114 F. Supp. 3d 549, 553 (E.D. Tenn. 2014) (quoting 63 Fed. Reg. 26,252). Skilled nursing facilities use a clinical assessment tool referred to as......
-
United States ex rel. Integra Med Analytics, LLC v. Creative Sols. in Healthcare, Inc.
...that contractors buy American-made staplers. Escobar, 136 S. Ct. at 2003-4. See also Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, "Life Care Centers of America, Inc. Agrees to Pay $145 Million to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations Relating to the Provision of Medically Unnecessary Rehabilitation......
-
False Claims Act: 2018 Year in Review
...attempts to use them in unsealed litigation as proof of falsity to varying degrees of success. Compare U.S. ex rel. Martin v. Life Care Ctrs. of Am., 114 F. Supp. 3d 549 (E.D. Tenn. 2014) (allowing the use of sampling and extrapolation) with U.S. ex rel. Wall v. Vista Hospice Care, Inc., No......
-
Qui Tam Quarterly - Data on Defense: Invalidating FCA Allegations Based on Statistical Sampling and Extrapolation
...under the FCA or Does Each Provision of the Statute Require Individual Proofs?, 41 AM. J. TRIAL ADVOC. 335 (2017).9 Id. at 350.10 114 F. Supp. 3d 549, 560 (explaining that one of the reasons courts permit the use of statistical sampling in cases regarding fraud against the government is tha......
-
"Supreme Court Permits Use of Statistical 'Representational Evidence': Implications for the FCA"
...Download PDF John T. Bentivoglio Jennifer L. Bragg Michael K. Loucks Gregory M. Luce United States ex rel. Martin v. Life Care Ctrs. of Am., Inc., 114 F. Supp. 3d 549, 565-68 (E.D. Tenn. 2014) (allowing use of statistical sampling to prove the elements of FCA claims); United States v. Fadul......
-
Healthcare Industry Beware: The Use of Statistical Sampling to Establish Damages and Liability Under the False Claims Act Remains a Viable Option for Plaintiffs
...follow developments in this important and unsettled area of law. Matthew Turetzky Robert Rhoad United States v. Life Care Centers of America, Inc., 114 F. Supp. 3d 549, 565-570 (E.D. Tenn. 2014) (rejecting defendant’s argument that statistical sampling cannot be used to establish liability)......
-
Lies and Statistics: Statistical Sampling in Liability Determinations Under the False Claims Act.
...June 25, 2015), aff'd in part, appeal dismissed in part, 848 F.3d 330 (4th Cir. 2017); United States ex rel. Martin v. Life Care Ctrs. of Am., Inc., 114 F. Supp. 3d 549, 570-71 (E.D. Tenn. 2014). (13.) Compare Martin, 114 F. Supp. 3d at 556, 569-70 (accepting sampling to show liability with......
-
B. Calculating Damages Under the False Claims Act
...States v. Vista Hospice Care, Inc., 3:07-CV-00604-M, 2016 WL 3449833 (N.D. Tex. June 20, 2016).[124] 106 F. Supp. 2d 234 (2000).[125] 114 F. Supp. 3d 549, 570-72 (E.D. Tenn. 2014).[126] Id. at 570-71.[127] United States v. Carr, 132 U.S. 644, 650 (1890); Wis. Cent. R.R. v. United States, 16......