Hendricks v. Bronson Methodist Hosp., Inc. (Summary)

QUI TAM

Hendricks v. Bronson Methodist Hosp., Inc., No. 1:13-CV-294 (W.D. Mich. July 30, 2014)

The United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan dismissed a physician-relator’s qui tam claims for being insufficiently vague, while allowing a personal claim of termination of employment in violation of public policy to survive.

A physician-relator brought a qui tam action against a hospital alleging that hospital-employed physicians had certified sonogram reports without having acquired the expertise to review them, and, in some instances, issued a report without reviewing the associated sonograms, claiming that billing the federal and state governments based on these practices violated the federal False Claims Act and the Michigan Medicaid False Claims Act. The physician-relator also claimed that soon after she began complaining to the hospital about these practices, she was terminated.

The court found that the physician-relator’s allegations did not satisfy the heightened pleading requirements of those alleging fraud, deeming it insufficient for her to merely point out the existence of a fraudulent scheme, without specifying a given time or place of the alleged violations. The court also found that the physician-relator did not articulate a particular injury – she alleged that the government may have paid claims it would not otherwise have paid – and that was too vague. The physician-relator then argued that a relaxed pleading standard should apply to her, but the court found that her claims lacked the personal knowledge required to meet a relaxed standard. Thus, the court dismissed the qui tam claims.

However, the court did not dismiss the physician-relator’s claim in her individual capacity that the hospital terminated her employment in violation of state public policy (termination for failure or refusal to violate the law during employment), and allowed that claim to go forward.