Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Penalties for violations of Stark Law include: denial of payment for the DHS provided; refund of monies received by physicians and facilities for amounts collected; payment of civil penalties of up to $15,000 for each service that a person "knows or should know" was provided in violation of the law, and three times the amount of improper payment the entity received from the Medicare program ...
The Anti-Kickback Statute [1] (AKS) is an American federal law prohibiting financial payments or incentives for referring patients or generating federal healthcare business. . The law, codified at 42 U.S. Code § 1320a–7b(b), [2] imposes criminal and, particularly in association with the federal False Claims Act, civil liability on those who knowingly and willfully offer, solicit, receive ...
AC — Appeal Cases (United Kingdom law report) ACC — Association of Corporate Counsel; AD - South African Law Reports, Appellate Division; ad., ads., adsm. — ad sectam (Latin), at the suit of. Used in colonial and Federal Era American cases when the defendant is listed first; e.g., "John Doe v. Richard Roe" is labeled "Richard Roe ads ...
This case was the beginning of the plenary power legal doctrine that has been used in Indian case law to limit tribal sovereignty. Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884) An Indian cannot make himself a citizen of the United States without the consent and the co-operation of the United States Federal government. United States v.
The purpose of such a remedy, as in securities cases, is "to deprive the wrongdoer of his or her ill-gotten gains and to deter violations of the law." [9] However, in such cases, the court may order disgorgement only up to "the amount with interest by which a defendant profited from his or her wrongdoing." [9]
Prosecutors announced indictments against seven more defendants accused of operating illegal gaming in Stark County or helping to hide their profits.
Stark County Prosecutor's Office stops prosecuting involuntary manslaughter case in light of new evidence.
The first qui tam case under the amended False Claims Act was filed in 1987 by an eye surgeon against an eye clinic and one of its doctors, alleging unnecessary surgeries and other procedures were being performed. [18] The case settled in 1988 for a total of $605,000. However, the law was primarily used in the beginning against defense contractors.