|
Commitments and Contingencies
|
3 Months Ended |
|---|---|
|
Mar. 31, 2015
|
|
| Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] | |
| Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Legal In the ordinary course of our business, we become involved in pending and threatened legal actions and proceedings, most of which involve claims of medical malpractice related to medical services provided by our affiliated clinicians. We may also become subject to other lawsuits, which could involve significant claims and/or significant defense costs. We believe, based upon our review of pending actions and proceedings, that the outcome of such legal actions and proceedings will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. The outcome of such actions and proceedings, however, cannot be predicted with certainty and an unfavorable resolution of one or more of them could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows in a future period. Government Claim On June 7, 2010, we received a civil investigative demand (CID) issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ), U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois. The CID requested information concerning claims that we have submitted to Medicare and Medicaid. The CID covered the period from January 1, 2003, through June 4, 2010, and requested production of a range of documents relating to our Medicare and Medicaid participation, physician arrangements, operations, billings and compliance programs. We believe we have a strong compliance focus, and that we operate with appropriate billing policies, procedures, provider training, and compliance programs and controls. We produced responsive documents and were in contact with representatives of the DOJ who informed us that the inquiry related to a qui tam whistleblower action filed under court seal in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago). We also were informed that several state attorneys general were examining our Medicaid claims in coordination with the DOJ. Though we cooperated with the government’s investigation and would welcome a resolution to this matter, we are now in active litigation with the federal government regarding this matter and intend to contest the case vigorously. On December 6, 2013, the U.S. District Court partially lifted the seal on the civil False Claims Act case related to this investigation. The unsealed portions of the Court docket include the whistleblower’s Complaint, which contains allegations of improper billing to Medicare and Medicaid, a Notice of Election to Intervene filed by the federal government and a Notice of Election to Decline Intervention filed by the State of Illinois and 12 other states that participated in the investigation. On June 16, 2014, the federal government filed its Complaint in Intervention against IPC and several of its subsidiaries in the U.S. District Court. The Complaint in Intervention contains allegations of improper billing to Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs from January 1, 2003 to the present, seeks to recover treble damages and civil penalties under the civil False Claims Act, and seeks to recover damages under the common law theories of payment by mistake and unjust enrichment. On August 13, 2014, IPC and the IPC subsidiary defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the Complaint in Intervention or, in the alternative, to sever claims against the defendants. The federal government filed its response on September 18, 2014, to which the defendants replied on September 25, 2014. The court’s decision, which was filed on February 17, 2015, granted the motion to dismiss in part and denied it in part. The Court’s Opinion and Order dismissed the 29 IPC subsidiary and affiliate defendants without prejudice, but the Court denied the request to dismiss IPC, which remains the sole defendant in the lawsuit. The parties have begun active discovery. It is not possible to predict when this matter may be resolved, the time or resources that we will need to devote to this litigation, or what impact, if any, the outcome of this matter might have on our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. Derivative Lawsuit Although the underlying government lawsuit is still in an early stage and no liability has been found by a court, on October 20 and 24, 2014, shareholder derivative lawsuits were filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against certain of our current and former directors and officers. We are named as a nominal defendant in both suits. The actions both assert alleged breaches of fiduciary duties related to our billing practices, and incorporate allegations from the False Claims Act case. The lawsuits seek a variety of relief, including monetary damages and injunctive relief. On December 4, 2014, the derivative lawsuits were consolidated into one lawsuit. The litigation is in an early stage and it is not possible to predict when this matter may be resolved, the time or resources that we will need to devote to this litigation, or what impact, if any, the outcome of this matter might have on our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. |