Tag Archives: health law

Report: Florida Received an F in Medical Pricing Transparency

By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

6 Indest-2008-3In Florida, it’s difficult to compare prices for medical services and procedures because the various prices are not made public. In part because of this, a recent study by a health-care advocacy group gave Florida an F for transparencies in pricing.


What Did the Analysis Look For?

The report analyzed whether or not states have laws and regulations that require health prices be made public.

Only One State Received an A.

The only state to receive an A in the study was New Hampshire. This is because of its NH Health-Cost site. The site provides consumers prices based on geography, type of insurance and other factors for everything from a basic visit to complicated medical tests. Consumers are able to go on the site and compare prices.

Florida Was Not the Only State to Receive an F.

Every state except five received the lowest grade from the Catalyst for Payment Reform and the Health Care Incentives Institute. So, if F was the average grade, I guess that means that Florida actually only received a C. Maybe there should be a “No State Left Behind” policy.

Comments?

Would you have given Florida an F? Do you think every state should have a health-cost website? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Kassab, Beth. “Hidden prices for health care earn Florida an F for transparency.” Orlando Sentinel. (July 16, 2015). Print.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice.  Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.  www.TheHealthLawFirm.com  The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Florida attorney, health care lawyer, health care attorney, law, health law, health care law, medical services, physician attorney, health care defense attorney, health care defense lawyer, health care, health care coverage, health law attorney, health law lawyer, The Health Law Firm

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2015 The Health Law firm. All rights reserved.

Federal Health Officials Propose Medicare Paying Doctors to Discuss End-of-Life Issues

4 Indest-2009-3By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released a new plan for doctors to discuss end-of-life issues with their patients. The plan is part of the CMS annual Medicare physician payment rule. This comes six years after the original controversy when President Obama first announced his health care legislation.

Doctors Will Be Paid for Discussing Treatment Options with Elderly Patients.

In what can only be described as welcomed and needed relief, the rule would reimburse doctors for discussing living wills and end-of-life medical treatment options with older patients. The medical discussions include long-term treatment options, like heart transplants. It also handles advance care planning, including a patient who desires treatment for a condition that affects his or her decision-making. These are conversations already taking place, but physicians are not currently paid for them.

The Pressure is on Medicare.

Medicare reimbursement is extremely important for elderly and disabled persons. As the second-largest insurer, many private insurers also follow the same rules Medicare adopts. Their place in the end-of-life care has long been debated. Whether or not health care professionals should be reimbursed for hospice and end-of-life treatment talks has been the center of debate. Physician groups and patient advocates have been pushing the health program to pay doctors for these consultations.

Many advocacy groups, including the American Medical Association (AMA), support the proposal. The AMA believes it’s the patient’s choice to plan advance-care decisions. Research has shown that there are great benefits to elders in advance-care planning and having their end-of-life wishes known to others. Receiving timely knowledge from physicians and health professionals can result in better decisions and ease of mind.

Rules Previously Criticized as “Death Panels” by Ignoramuses.

Sarah Palin, the towering mountain of medical knowledge and intellectual analysis, who dragged down John McCain into defeat during the elections of 2008, previously denounced similar payment provisions in the past. Sparking a great deal of unnecessary controversy, Palin claimed the health care reform legislation would create “death panels.” As a result of these and other similar accusations, the provision was removed from the final Affordable Care Act legislation. This deprived elders of useful knowledge and deprived health care providers of payment for their services. To read more about the “death panel” controversy, click here.

Comments?

What do you think of end-of-life discussions? Do you think they should be in place? Should physicians be reimbursed?  Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Sources:

Grier, Peter. “ ‘Death Panel’ Controversy Very Much Alive.” The Christian Science Monitor. (Aug. 21, 2009). From: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2009/0821/death-panel-controversy-remains-very-much-alive

Sun, Lena H. “Medicare Proposes to Pay Doctors to Have End-of-Life Care Discussions.” The Washington Post. (July 8, 2015). From:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/medicare-proposes-to-pay-doctors-to-have-end-of-life-care-discussions/2015/07/08/1d7bb436-25a7-11e5-aae2-6c4f59b050aa_story.html

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.


About the author:
George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law.  He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice.  Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area.  www.TheHealthLawFirm.com  The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Medicare, federal health, health law, health law attorney, health law lawyer, end-of-life issues, The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), CMS, Medicaid, healthcare, health care, health care attorney, health care lawyer, physicians, physician attorney, health care legislation, Affordable Care Act, ACA, medicine, the health law firm, death panel, death panel controversy, Medicare investigations, Medicaid investigations, elderly healthcare, senior health care, American Medical Association

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2015 The Health Law firm. All rights reserved.

Chinese Nationals Indicted in Alleged U.S. Test-Taking Scheme

6 Indest-2008-3By George F. Indest, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

Fifteen Chinese citizens living in the United States reportedly conspired to take college entrance exams for others so they could obtain student visas, according to the Associated Press. The frauds allegedly took standardized exams including the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), the Graduate Record Examination (GRE), and the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL).

The Test-Taking Conspiracy.

According to BBC News, the scheme reportedly took place between 2011 and 2015, mainly in western Pennsylvania. Six individuals named in the indictment were identified as students who supposedly paid up to $6,000 to have other individuals, also charged, take the tests. The test-takers purportedly “impersonated others, and those others were able to use the fraudulent test scores to obtain F1 visas,” U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania David Hickton told the Associated Press. The individuals allegedly used fake passports that contained the students’ personal information, but a picture of the test-taker substituted for the student.

Testing Services Cooperate with the Investigation.

Princeton, New Jersey-based Educational Testing Service and the New York-based College Board are cooperating with the investigation, according to Hickton. “Their actions are consistent with the College Board’s commitment to identify and stop illegal activity that undermines the integrity of our exams and the hard work of students around the world,” College Board vice president Stacy Caldwell told the Associated Press. Educational Testing Service administers the SAT, GRE, and TOEFL exams, while the College Board oversees SAT registration.

Offenders Expected to Receive More Than Just a Slap on the Wrist.

The charges against the suspects include conspiracy, counterfeiting passports, mail and wire fraud, BBC News reported. The defendants, both male and female ranging in age from 19 to 26, could face up to 20 years in prison if convicted. According to BBC’s report, Special Agent in Charge of Homeland Security Investigations of Philadelphia John Kelleghan believes “these students were not only cheating their way into the university, they were also cheating their way through our nation’s immigration system.”

Due to the ongoing investigation, a final number has not yet been released documenting an exact number of suspects believed to be involved in the ruse.

Is There Similar Activity Going On in Medical Testing for NBME, USMLE or ECFMG Administered Tests?

There have been somewhat similar alleged test-taking fraudulent activities involving medical testing. From time to time we are consulted by individuals who have been caught using fraudulent documents to attempt to take the USMLE Step exams. We are also aware of allegations that there have been compromises of actual examinations involving foreign nationals. For example, see the blog I wrote on the Optima scandal.

On the whole, the NBME, USMLE, and ECFMG and their testing centers do an excellent job in screening out fraudulent test takers. It would be foolish for anyone who ever hoped to be a practicing physician to try to perpetrate a fraud in taking these tests.

Comments?

What are your thoughts on these allegations? Do you feel standardized testing should be monitored more heavily to prevent test-taking fraud from occurring? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to medical, dental, chiropractic, other professional students, residents, interns and fellows in academic disputes, contract negotiations, license applications, board certification applications and hearings, credential hearings, and civil and administrative litigations.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

“Chinese Nationals Accused of Taking SATs for Others.” BBC News. (May 28 2015). From:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32921737

Mandak, Joe. “Feds Indict 15 Chinese in Alleged College Test-Taking Scheme.” The Associated Press. (May 28, 2015). From:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/feds-indict-15-chinese-alleged-college-test-taking-31366456

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M. is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: medical students, standardized tests, irregular behavior, fraud, defense attorney, legal representation, criminal proceeding, administrative law, health law, health care attorney, health care lawyer, defense lawyer, GME, graduate medical education, Step exams, medical interns, medical residents, ECFMG lawyer, USMLE attorney, foreign medical graduate attorney, legal counsel, legal advocate

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2015 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

New MCAT Will Put the Social Skills of Potential Doctors to the Test

4 Indest-2009-3By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

The 8,200 aspiring doctors expected to take the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) this year will be seeing a different exam than their predecessors.

The doctor-patient dynamic is changing. So, to stay on top of this shift in the health care industry, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) announced in April 2015, the first major revision to the MCAT in 25 years. This test is the first high-stake exam encountered by physicians. The big difference physician hopefuls will notice is that the new test assesses social aptitude and not just hard science.

The New MCAT.

There are some old reliables on the MCAT that are here to stay. The exam will still test on biological sciences and physical sciences.

Here’s what has changed:

– Students will have more questions to answer, but more time to complete each question;

– The new MCAT adds a section covering introductory psychology, sociology and neuroscience;

– The MCAT has replaced its old section on “verbal reasoning” with a broader test of comprehension in the humanities and social sciences;

– The test has eliminated the essay;

– There is a new emphasis on research, including designing studies and analyzing their results;

– The scoring for the new test will be different; and

– Scores for each of the four sections of the MCAT will be reported separately, so medical schools can emphasize or de-emphasize some parts if they choose.

The AAMC created 900 free videos to help students prepare for the new test. To review those videos, click here.

What This Means for Test Takers?

According to a press release from the AAMC, the new MCAT test is part of a broader effort to improve the medical school admission process and to support the holistic review of applicants, which balances experiences, attributes and academic metrics. To read the press release from the AAMC, click here.

There has been a paradigm shift in medical education to acknowledge the competencies physicians need beyond medical knowledge. Doctors now need to possess a broad set of skills that will treat the whole patient. The new exam reflects these changes. It should be obvious that a good physician is well-rounded with many skills that stretch far beyond basic sciences. These proficiencies are now being tested and emphasized at an earlier age.

Regardless of the changes, the same keys to succeeding as a physician applicant will apply: strong grades, competitive MCAT scores, well-rounded extracurricular activities, outstanding recommendation letters, and a promising interview.

Comments?

What are your thoughts on the new MCAT test? Do you think testing more than just basic science on the MCAT is a positive change or unnecessary? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Sources:

Diamond, Dan. “For the New Doctors We Need, The New MCAT Isn’t Enough.” Forbes. (April 22, 2015). From: http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2015/04/22/we-need-a-new-type-of-doctor-but-will-the-new-mcat-be-enough/

Beck, Melinda. “Medical-College Entrance Exam Gets an Overhaul.” Wall Street Journal. (April 15, 2015). From: http://news.doximity.com/entries/1701511?user_id=2169203

Association of American Medical Colleges. “Future Physicians Take New Medical College Admission Test.” (April 20, 2015). From: https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/newsreleases/430138/20150420.html

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1999-2015 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

The Ins and Outs of Florida’s 2015 Legislative Session for Health Care Providers

10 Indest-2008-7George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in the Legal Specialty of Health Law

Committees are busy in Tallahassee as the 2015 Legislative Session is set to begin on March 3, 2015. For Florida physicians and other health care providers, now is the time to review the legislative bills that could affect you and your practice. There are many bills pending that could impact the future of medical practice and health care delivery in Florida.

On the table are some recognizable bills from last year, as well as a few new ones. To stay up to date on the 2015 Legislative Session as it relates to health care, check this blog regularly.

Bills Up for Consideration.

The two most profiled issues from the 2014 Legislative Session are back.

– House Bill (HB) 547 and the companion Senate bill (SB) 614 would give nurse practitioners the ability to prescribe controlled substances. It would also expand their scope of practice, which would exempt them from the requirement that certain medical acts be performed or supervised by a physician. To learn more on this bill, click here for our previous blog.

– HB 545 and the companion Senate bill SB 478 defines what is determined to be telemedicine or telehealth. These bills call for coverage in Medicaid programs. Lawmakers state an agreement has been made to require health care providers to be licensed in Florida to provide telemedicine in the state. House and Senate leaders have expressed confidence they will reach an agreement this year on telemedicine. Click here to learn more on telemedicine in Florida.

Each bill could dramatically change the landscape of the practice of Florida medicine.

Keep an Eye on These Additional Bills.

Other pending bills that could impact the delivery of health care in Florida, include:

– SB 516 addresses insurance coverage and reimbursement issues for emergency services;

– HB 279 would allow pharmacy interns to administer vaccinations to adults;

– HB 281 and SB 532 would allow licensed physician assistants under physician supervision to order controlled substances in the hospital setting; and

– HB 515 and SB 710 revise the scope of physical therapists and prohibit individuals with doctorates in physical therapy to present themselves as a doctor without informing the public of his or her actual profession as a physical therapist.

In Conclusion.

The 2015 Legislative Session is packed with bills that, if approved, will affect physicians, physician assistants, nurses, and other health care providers. As a health care provider, knowing the ins and outs of these bills can save you from the headache and possible fines that could come from non-compliance. We urge you to become involved with these issues. If you would like to know more, you can contact your local medical society. Again, we will stay on top of the progress of these bills, so check this blog regularly.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys.

The Health Law Firm routinely represents physicians, pharmacists, pharmacies, optometrists, nurses and other health providers in investigations, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, HIPAA complaints and violations, NPDB actions, inspections and audits involving the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Health (DOH) and other law enforcement agencies. Its attorneys include those who are board certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law as well as licensed health professionals who are also attorneys.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Stone, Rick. “PAs, Nurse Practitioners Could Get Prescribing Authority.” Health News Florida. (February 11, 2015). From: http://health.wusf.usf.edu/post/pas-nurse-practitioners-could-get-prescribing-authority?utm_source=Health+News+Florida+eAlert+subscriber+list&utm_campaign=e231ee3f8a-Friday_February_13_20152_13_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8d22eaa6f6-e231ee3f8a-249582973

Saunders, Jim. “Telemedicine Deal Likely in 2015, Legislators Say.” Orlando Sentinel. (February 3, 2014). From: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/os-florida-telemedicine-deal-20150203-story.html

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1999-2015 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Trial Court Must Hold Evidentiary Hearing to Determine Disputed Facts in Public Records Act Suit

10 Indest-2008-7Edited by George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in the Legal Specialty of Health Law

An interesting summary of a Florida appellate case from Florida’s First District Court of Appeal recently came across my desk. Florida has a very broad Public Records Act and Sunshine Act. We are often involved in suing state agencies for force disclosure of documents and information.

The following is from a summary that was originally published in the newsletter of the Florida Bar’s Administrative Law Section.

Clay Cnty. Ed. Ass’n u. Clay Cnty. Sch. Bd., 144 So. 3d 708 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).

After requesting various public records related to the Clay County School Board’s operation, and receiving only some of the responsive documents, the Clay County Education Association (CCEA) filed a petition for a writ of mandamus with the circuit court to compel production of the records. In unsworn defenses to the complaint, the school board stated that it had already produced the documents, did not have the information in the requested format, or that the requested documents did not exist. The circuit court granted the school board’s motion to dismiss the complaint, and the CCEA appealed.

The First District Court of Appeal reversed, finding that CCEA’s petition for writ of mandamus was legally sufficient. The complaint alleged a violation of a clear legal right and breach of an indisputable legal duty, thereby showing a prima facie basis for relief.

The appellate court also concluded that the circuit court erred by failing to hold an evidentiary hearing to resolve disputed issues of fact, which CCEA requested. The school board’s defenses likewise created issues of fact that should have been grounds for a priority bearing under section 119.01, Florida Statutes.

Additional Comments.

This case is important for several reasons. It took place in the First District Court of Appeal. Since most Florida agencies are located in Tallahassee, most Public Records Act cases are filed there. Additionally this shows that the Florida Appellate Courts will require trial courts to actually have evidentiary hearings and trials when there are facts in contention between the parties, which is good for citizens.

Contact The Health Law Firm Attorneys Experienced in Administrative Law.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm represent clients in administrative and civil litigation (both state and federal) throughout the state and in other states as permitted by their rules. We also represent clients in cases involving the Florida Public Records Act, the Sunshine Act, the Federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Privacy Act. Our attorneys are available to provide emergency hearing coverage, administrative hearing representation, emergency board representation (Board of Medicine, Board of Dentistry, Board of Nursing, Board of Osteopathic Medicine, Board of Pharmacy, Board of Psychology, Board of Licensed Clinical Social Work, Marriage & Family Therapy & Mental Health Counseling and other professional boards), as well as the Agency for Health Care Administration, emergency deposition coverage and other litigation coverage on short notice. Should you need local counsel or just coverage for a hearing or deposition, we are available; contact us.

Source: The original case summary discussed above was originally published in the Administrative Law Section Newsletter, Vol. 34, No. 2 (Dec. 2014), a publication of The Administrative Law Section of the Florida Bar.

 

The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1999-2015 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Physician Argues Definition of “Peer” at Formal Administrative Hearing

peer reviewFACTS: The Agency for Health Care Administration (“AHCA”) is responsible for administering Florida’s Medicaid program and conducting investigations and audits of paid claims to ascertain if Medicaid providers have been overpaid. With regard to investigations of physicians, section 409.9131, Florida Statutes, provides that AHCA must have a “peer” evaluate Medicaid claims before the initiation of formal proceedings by AHCA to recover overpayments. Section 409.9131(2)(c) defines a “peer” as “a Florida licensed physician who is, to the maximum extent possible, of the same specialty or subspecialty, licensed under the same chapter, and in active practice.” Section “109.9131(2)(a) deems a physician to be in “active practice” if he or she has “regularly provided medical care and treatment to patients within the past two years.”

Alfred Murciano, M.D., treats patients who are hospitalized in Level III neonatal intensive care units and pediatric intensive care units in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach County hospitals. His practice is limited to pediatric infectious disease. He has been certified by the American Board of Pediatrics in two areas: General Pediatrics and Pediatric Infectious Diseases. AHCA initiated a review of Medicaid claims submitted by Dr. Murciano between September 1, 2008, and August 31, 2010, and referred those claims to Richard Keith O’Hern, M.D., for peer review. Dr. O’Hern practiced medicine for 37 years, and was engaged in a private general pediatric practice until he retired in December of 2012. During the course of his career, he was certified by the American Board of Pediatrics in General Pediatrics, completed a one-year infectious disease fellowship at the The University of Florida, and treated approximately 16,000 babies with infectious disease issues. However, he was never board certified in pediatric infectious diseases, and at the time he reviewed Dr. Murciano’s Medicaid claims, Dr. O’Hern would have been ineligible for board certification in pediatric infectious diseases. In addition, Dr. O’Hern would have been unable to treat Dr. Murciano’s hospitalized patients in Level III NICUs and PICUs.

After Dr. O’Hern’s review, AHCA issued a Final Agency Audit Report alleging Dr Murciano had been overpaid by $l,051.992.99, and that he was required to reimburse AHCA for the overpayment. In addition, AHCA stated it was seeking to impose a fine of $210,398.60.

OUTCOME: Dr. Murciano argued at the formal administrative hearing that Dr O’Hern was not a “peer” as that term is defined in section 409.9131(20)(c). The ALJ agreed and issued a Recommended Order on May 22, 2014, recommending that AHCA’s case be dismissed because it failed to satisfy a condition precedent to initiating formal proceedings. While recognizing that AHCA is not required to retain a reviewing physician with the exact credentials as the physician under review, the ALJ concluded Dr. O’Hern was not of the same specialty as Dr. Murciano.

On July 31, 2014, AHCA rendered a Partial Final Order rejecting the ALJ’s conclusion that Dr. O’Hern was not a “peer.” In the course of ruling that it has substantive jurisdiction over such conclusions and that its interpretation of section 409.9131(2)(c), Florida Statutes, is entitled to deference, AHCA stated that it interprets the statute “to mean that the peer must practice in the same area as Respondent, hold the same professional license as Respondent, and be in active practice like Respondent.” AHCA concluded that “Dr. O’Hern is indeed a ‘peer’ of Respondent under the Agency’s interpretation of Section 409.9131(2)(c), Florida Statutes, because he too has a Florida medical license, is a pediatrician and had an active practice at the time he reviewed Respondent’s records. That Dr. O’Hern did not hold the same certification as Respondent, or have a professional practice identical to Respondent in no way means he is not a ‘peer’ of Respondent.” AHCA’s rejection of the ALJ’s conclusion of law regarding Dr. O’Hern’s “peer” status caused AHCA to remand the case back to the ALJ to make the factual findings on the claimed overpayments that were not made in the Recommended Order because of the ALJ’s conclusion that Dr. O’Hern did not qualify as a “peer.”

On August 18, 2014, the ALJ issued an Order respectfully declining AHCA’s remand. AHCA then filed a Petition for writ of Mandamus in the First District Court of Appeal, asking the court to direct the ALA to accept the remand and to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to each overpayment claim. The court assigned case number 1D14-3836 to AHCA’s Petition, and the case is pending.
Source:

AHCA v. Alfred Murciano, M.D., DOAH Case No. 13-0795MPI (Recommended Order May 22, 2014), AHCA Rendition No. 14-687-FOF-MDO (Partial Final Order July 31, 2014)
About the Author: The forgoing case summary was prepared by and appeared in the DOAH case notes of the Administrative Law Section newsletter, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Dec. 2014), a publication of the Administrative Law Section of The Florida Bar.