Close X
Attorney Spotlight

How does Jessie Zeigler anticipate the intersection of privacy and smart technology will impact the future of litigation? Find out more>

Search

Close X

Experience

Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

Primary Care Providers Win Challenge of CMS Interpretation of Enhanced Payment Law

With the help and support of the Tennessee Medical Association, 21 Tennessee physicians of underserved communities joined together and retained Bass, Berry & Sims to file suit against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to stop improper collection efforts. Our team, led by David King, was successful in halting efforts to recoup TennCare payments that were used legitimately to expand services in communities that needed them. Read more

Tennessee Medical Association & Bass, Berry & Sims

Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Healthcare Private Equity Compliance Checklist

The complex and ever-changing healthcare regulatory and enforcement environment, including increased focus on the role of private equity firms in their portfolio companies, make compliance a top priority for private equity firms investing in healthcare companies. The best way to limit your exposure as a private equity firm is to avoid a compliance misstep in the first place. Additionally, an effective and robust compliance program for your portfolio healthcare company makes it much more attractive to potential buyers and helps you avoid an unexpected and costly investigation or valuation hit down the road. Download the Healthcare Private Equity Compliance Checklist to assess whether your portfolio company's compliance program is up-to-date.

Click here to download the checklist.

Taylor Chenery Authors Law360 Article on FCA Liability

Law360

Publications

September 23, 2016

Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Taylor Chenery authored an article for Law360 addressing how ambiguities within complex government rules and regulations can lead to multiple interpretations and potentially expose a healthcare provider or government contractor to FCA liability.  "The question necessarily arises, then, at what point a provider's or contractor's regulatory interpretation may expose it to the harsh damages and penalties accompanying FCA liability rather than some lesser sanction if that interpretation ultimately differs from the government's or a court's," said Taylor. 

In the article, Taylor cites the Eighth Circuit's opinion in U.S. ex rel. Donegan v. Anesthesia Associates of Kansas City PC as the most recent case addressing this issue, suggesting that a provider faced with a potentially ambiguous regulation or statute can protect itself from possible FCA liability by taking steps to ensure that its interpretation of the ambiguous rule is reasonable under the circumstances. In the Donegan case, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling that the provider strongly demonstrated that its interpretation of a billing regulation was objectively reasonable in part because an unclear term had not been clarified by the government, government contractors or professional organizations.

The full article, "When Ambiguous Regs Preclude FCA Liability," was published by Law360 on September 22, 2016, and is available online. To learn more about this issue, read Taylor's blog post on the Inside the FCA blog from August 19, 2016, "Eighth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of FCA Claims Related to Ambiguous Regulation."


Related Professionals

Related Services

Notice

Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.