Civil / Business Law

Court Finds Defendant Doctor Committed Fraud on the Court, Grants Plaintiff Summary Judgment As Sanction

A doctor finds himself in an even worse position after he is alleged to have obstructed justice in a medical malpractice case brought against him personally, and against his professional corporation.  In the case out of the Circuit Court of Martinsville, the doctor was sanctioned for giving false answers to discovery requests, surreptitiously accessing the plaintiff’s medical records in violation of HIPAA, influencing a witness to testify falsely, and intentionally concealing evidence by hiding a…

Court Finds Defendant Doctor Committed Fraud on the Court, Grants Plaintiff Summary Judgment As Sanction Read More »

FCA Claim Cannot Survive On Allegations of Fraudulent Conduct Alone; Must Assert A Fraudulent Claim For Payment

The False Claims Act (“FCA”) is the primary vehicle used by the Federal Government to protect itself against fraud.  The FCA permits a private whistleblower (a “Relator”) to sue a contractor in the name of the United States, and to be awarded a portion of the damages recovered by the government.  That is exactly what a former employee attempted to do when he brought a claim against the largest contractor for the United States Army,

FCA Claim Cannot Survive On Allegations of Fraudulent Conduct Alone; Must Assert A Fraudulent Claim For Payment Read More »

“Lumping” Multiple Defendants Together Backfires for Plaintiffs; Court Has Discretion to Control Its Docket

A litigant who files a very aggressive lawsuit can sometimes slow down, rather than advance, his or her case.  That is exactly what happened to a retired physician and his irrevocable trust, after they brought suit in Virginia Federal Court against five separate defendants in order to recover over $1 million allegedly defrauded from them.  The case is Cook v. John Hancock Life Ins. Co. The dispute in the case arises out of the physician’s

“Lumping” Multiple Defendants Together Backfires for Plaintiffs; Court Has Discretion to Control Its Docket Read More »

Virginia Decides Issue of First Impression: Unserved Defendant Cannot Remove Diversity Case to Federal Court

According to a recent ruling in a case of first impression arising out of the Norfolk Division of the Eastern District of Virginia, a defendant who is a citizen of the forum state cannot remove a diversity case to federal court, even if the defendant has not yet been served with formal process, because to hold otherwise would be “absurd.” In Campbell v. Hampton Bankshares, Inc., et al., two Virginia banks were sued by their

Virginia Decides Issue of First Impression: Unserved Defendant Cannot Remove Diversity Case to Federal Court Read More »

“Legal Costs” Do Not Include Attorneys’ Fees, Fourth Circuit Rules

When a contract provided for the breaching party to pay the non-breaching party’s “legal costs,” the Fourth Circuit determined that attorneys’ fees were not included within this term.  The February 19, 2013 Fourth Circuit decision which vacates the District Court’s calculation of “legal costs” is Traxys North America v. Concept Mining Incorporated. The dispute involved a coal contract which stated that the breaching party would be obligated to pay “legal costs incurred by [the non-breaching]

“Legal Costs” Do Not Include Attorneys’ Fees, Fourth Circuit Rules Read More »

Scroll to Top