§

Fla. Stat. § 817.505

Section 817.505 - Patient brokering prohibited; exceptions; penalties
Section 817.505 - Patient brokering prohibited; exceptions; penalties

4 Citing briefs

  1. Connecticut General Life Insurance Company et al v. Sky Toxicology, Ltd. et al

    MOTION TO DISMISS 1 Complaint, FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM , MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction 1 Complaint

    Filed August 10, 2015

    Similarly, but for the existence of the plan language and Cigna’s ASO Agreements to administer them on behalf of the self-funded employers, there would be no relationship between Sky and Cigna with regard to those claims. Cigna’s claims for relief pursuant to Florida statutory violations (Fla. Stats. § 817.505, § 456.054 and §§ 501.

  2. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al v. Physicians Group of Sarasota, L.L.C. et al

    RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION to quash Non-Party Subpoenas of in the Alternative Motion for Protective Order and Request for Oral Argument

    Filed June 23, 2014

    PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. State Farm’s Complaint Alleges A Fraud Scheme That Includes Unlawful Kickbacks, Patient Brokering, And The Creation Of False Shell Companies To Hide The True Ownership And Control Of The Hotline. State Farm’s Complaint alleges a fraud scheme orchestrated by Gary Kompothecras and the other defendants in this action to obtain benefits under Florida’s No-Fault Statute for services that were not lawfully rendered because Defendants intentionally violated important criminal, civil and administrative laws to lure unwitting auto accident victims to receive services at Physicians Group clinics, including the Patient Brokering Act, (Fla. Stat. § 817.505), the Patient Self-Referral Act (Fla. Stat. § 456.053), the Anti-Kickback Statute (Fla. Stat. § 456.

  3. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al v. Physicians Group of Sarasota, L.L.C. et al

    MOTION for protective order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law

    Filed July 25, 2014

    PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND BACKGROUND A. State Farm’s Narrowly-Tailored Party And Third-Party Discovery Requests State Farm commenced this action on July 26, 2013, seeking to recover millions of dollars in damages it has incurred as a result of the fraudulent scheme orchestrated by Defendant Gary Kompothecras and carried out by the other Defendants. As set forth more fully in the Complaint, State Farm alleges that as part and parcel of their systematic fraudulent insurance scheme, Defendants lured unwitting auto accident victims to call the 1-800-ASK-GARY Hotline (“Hotline”), which funnels callers to receive services at Physicians Group clinics, in violation of several important criminal, civil and administrative laws, including the Patient Brokering Act, (Fla. Stat. § 817.505), the Patient Self-Referral Act (Fla. Stat. § 456.053), the Anti-Kickback Statute (Fla. Stat. § 456.

  4. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al v. Physicians Group of Sarasota, L.L.C. et al

    RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint

    Filed September 3, 2013

    II. STATEMENT OF FACTS A. State Farm’s Complaint This case involves a massive fraud scheme by defendants to obtain from State Farm No- Fault Benefits for services and treatments that were not lawful when they were rendered because 3 defendants intentionally violated several important criminal, civil and administrative laws to lure unwitting motor vehicle accident victims to receive services and treatments at Physicians Group clinics, including the Patient Brokering Act, (Fla. Stat. § 817.505), the Patient Self-Referral Act (Fla. Stat. § 456.053), the Anti-Kickback Statute (Fla. Stat. § 456.