whistleblower attorney

The government will intervene in a whistleblower lawsuit against Florida-based A Plus Home Health Care, Inc. and its owner, Tracy Nemerofsky, the U.S. Department of Justice announced last month.  A Plus allegedly offered referring physicians’ spouses sham marketing positions with the company to induce the physicians to refer Medicare patients for its home health care services.

The government alleges that, beginning in 2006, A Plus engaged in a scheme to increase Medicare referrals by hiring at least seven physicians’ spouses and one physician’s boyfriend to perform marketing duties but required them to perform few, if any, actual job duties.  The spouses’ and boyfriend’s salaries were allegedly an inducement and reward for the physicians’ referrals of Medicare patients to A Plus.  To cover up the scheme, the government alleges, Ms. Nemerofsky generated sham personnel files, which included lists of job duties that the spouses and boyfriend never performed, and performance reviews of tasks the spouses and boyfriend never completed, to give the false impression that the spouses and boyfriend were legitimate employees.

The lawsuit was originally filed by William Guthrie, a former A Plus director of development, under the whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act.  The False Claims Act allows private citizens with knowledge of fraud against the government to sue on behalf of the government and share in the recovery.  The government may then choose to intervene, as it elected to do in this case.

The Chanler Group, in association with the Hirst Law Group, represents whistleblowers who take action under the False Claims Act to report fraud committed against the federal and state governments.  We have years of experience representing whistleblower clients who expose every kind of fraud against the government, including health care fraud, contract fraud, and tax fraud.  Read more about our expertise in False Claims Act cases and how you can take action.

Two of the country’s largest commercial shredding services companies, Shred-It Incorporated and Iron Mountain, recently agreed to pay $1.1 million between them to settle allegations that the companies knowingly submitted or caused the submission of false claims to the federal government, related to contracts for secure shredding services, the U.S. Department of Justice announced this month.

According to the complaint (see below), Iron Mountain and Shred-It obtained government contracts to provide document-shredding services under certain terms, including that documents be shredded to a very secure size not exceeding 1/32 inch in width with a 1/64-inch tolerance by 1/2 inch in length.  (The smaller the shred size, the more secure the shredded document is against unauthorized attempts to reconstruct it.)  However, the defendants allegedly did not even possess equipment that could shred documents to the secure shred size that was agreed to in the contract.  Furthermore, the defendants allegedly obtained additional revenue by reselling the improperly shredded documents to paper recyclers.

The lawsuit was originally filed by Douglas Knisely, the owner and operator of a small, family-owned secure shredding business, under the whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act.  The False Claims Act allows private citizens with knowledge of fraud against the government to sue on behalf of the government and claim a share in the recovery.  Knisely’s share of the settlement has yet to be determined.

A third defendant, Cintas Corporation, continues to contest the allegations.

The Chanler Group, in association with the Hirst Law Group, represents whistleblowers who take action under the False Claims Act to report fraud committed against the federal and state governments.  We have years of experience representing whistleblower clients who expose every kind of fraud against the government, including health care fraud, contract fraud, and tax fraud.  Read more about our expertise in False Claims Act cases and how you can take action.

The polling and market research firm Gallup Organization has agreed to pay $10.5 million to resolve allegations that the company violated the False Claims Act and the Procurement Integrity Act for conduct involving several of its federal government contracts and subcontracts, the U.S. Department of Justice announced this month.  Gallup is headquartered in Washington, D.C.

The government alleged that Gallup knowingly overestimated labor hours in proposals to the U.S. Mint and State Department for contracts that were to be awarded without competition; as a result, the two federal agencies awarded Gallup contracts at inflated prices.  Gallup also allegedly engaged in improper employment negotiations with a then-Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) official, Timothy Cannon, in order to obtain a FEMA subcontract at an inflated price and additional FEMA funding after the subcontract was awarded. 

Separately, in April 2013, Cannon paid the government $40,000 to resolve allegations that he violated the Procurement Integrity Act by improperly negotiating for and accepting an offer of employment from Gallup while being personally and substantially involved in Gallup’s subcontract with FEMA.  In related criminal proceedings, on January 15, 2013, Cannon pled guilty to a federal conflict of interest statute, and was subsequently sentenced to probation. 

The lawsuit was originally filed by Michael Lindley, a former Gallup employee, under the whistleblower provision of the False Claims Act.  The False Claims Act allows private citizens with knowledge of fraud against the government to sue on behalf of the government and share in the recovery.  Lindley will receive $1.9 million as his share of the settlement.

The Chanler Group, in association with the Hirst Law Group, represents whistleblowers who take action under the False Claims Act to report fraud committed against the federal and state governments.  We have years of experience representing whistleblower clients who expose every kind of fraud against the government, including health care fraud, contract fraud, and tax fraud.  Read more about our expertise in False Claims Act cases and how you can take action.

Dr. Anthony Held, Russell Brimer, and John Moore, clients of The Chanler Group--whom previously filed a lawsuit against the California Attorney General (AG) challenging the validity of the AG's regulation (11 CCR sec. 3003) requiring citizen enforcers to file a motion to approve a Proposition 65 settlement at least 45 days before the hearing on the motion, rather than 16 court days before the hearing as allowed by Code of Civil Procedure sec.1005(b) --today filed an opposition brief to the AG's motion for judgment on the pleadings, which seeks dismissal of the case.  The AG's regulation clearly conflicts with the state statute.  In their opposition brief, Held, Brimer, and Moore argue that by adopting the 45-day regulation, the Attorney General’s Office has unconstitutionally arrogated to itself a legislative function of determining the amount of notice required for filing a motion to approve a Proposition 65 settlement and is thereby clearly interfering with the Legislature’s enactment of Code of Civil Procedure sec.1005(b), which had determined that 16-court days was a "reasonable balance"  between the court's need for time to review motions and litigants' desire to have their motions heard in a timely manner.

Held, Brimer, and Moore argue that: "The State’s ongoing budget crisis has adversely affected both the judicial and executive branches of state government.  Courts and clerks’ offices are short on staff and impaired in their ability to expeditiously process court filings and motions, which when added to the challenged 45-day notice period for motions to approve Proposition 65 settlements, creates further delay to the approval of settlements that are in the public interest.  This delay, in turn, postpones the collection of millions of dollars in civil penalties payable to the State of California and extends injunctive relief deadlines—which most often require defendants to reformulate their products to virtually eliminate the presence of chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and reproductive harm—that are often tied to the date of court approval."

The Chanler Group represents citizen enforcers who, acting in the public interest, commence actions against businesses offering products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm without first providing the health hazard warning required by Proposition 65. Citizen enforcers bringing Proposition 65 actions in the public interest may obtain a Court Judgment imposing civil penalties, an injunction requiring reformulation of products, and/or provision of health hazard warnings. The Chanler Group has represented citizen enforcers of Proposition 65 for more than twenty years.

Read Held, Brimer, and Moore's Opposition Brief Below.

A former hospice physician recently secured a $750,000 settlement from the City of San Francisco after he filed complaints alleging that his layoff was the result of retaliation for whistleblower complaints that San Francisco’s Laguna Honda Hospital and Rehabilitation Center (“Laguna Honda Hospital”) had misused patient funds and knowingly entered into a conflict of interest.

Dr. Derek Kerr, a hospice physician for over 20 years at Laguna Honda Hospital, filed complaints against the hospital in late 2010, alleging that it misused patient gift funds and knowingly entered into a conflict of interest when it established a relationship with a non-profit that had connections to management at the hospital.  The day after he filed the complaints, Kerr received a layoff notice.

Kerr reported the layoff to the San Francisco Ethics Commission as whistleblower retaliation, which is prohibited under California Government Code section 53298, California Health and Safety Code section 1432, and California Labor Code section 1102.5.  He later filed a complaint in the San Francisco County Superior Court and eventually negotiated a $750,000 settlement with the city, and an agreement that a plaque be installed at the hospital commemorating his work there.  He will also be lauded by the very officials who were allegedly responsible for his layoff.

The Chanler Group, in association with the Hirst Law Group, represents whistleblowers who have been subject to retaliation for taking action under the False Claims Act to report fraud committed against the federal and state governments.  We have years of experience representing whistleblower clients who expose every kind of fraud against the government, including health care fraud, contract fraud, and tax fraud.  Read more about our expertise in False Claims Act cases and how you can take action.