Articles and Blogs

The Indiana Court of Appeals (the “Court”) recently reiterated that trial courts may not impose “special conditions” in civil commitment orders without record evidence tying the condition to the patient’s treatment or public safety. The Court invalidated a trial court’s blanket prohibition on alcohol and non-prescription drugs, finding no evidentiary basis for the restriction.... READ MORE

In U.S. ex rel. Wilkerson v. Allergan, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (the “Court”) recently ruled that “but-for” causation is required for liability under the False Claims Act (“FCA”) resulting from alleged Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) violations. This opinion aligns with the First, Sixth and Eighth Circuits, which deviated from the... READ MORE

Health care and other federal funding recipients face new risks on multiple fronts in their use of diversity, equity and inclusion (“DEI”) programs. The Executive Branch has undertaken a concerted effort to reshape the interpretation and enforcement of federal civil rights laws impacting DEI practices through the issuance of Executive Orders, as discussed here, and... READ MORE

On April 24, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (the “Seventh Circuit” or “Court”) affirmed summary judgment in Partin v. Baptist Healthcare Sys., Inc., applying the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework to Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (“EMTALA”) retaliation claims. Case Background Plaintiff Dr. William Partin (“Partin”) was an... READ MORE

On April 14, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (the “Court”) reversed the conviction of Mark Sorensen under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”), holding that payments to marketing firms and manufacturers – absent influence over health care decisions – do not constitute illegal kickbacks. Notably, this marks the Seventh Circuit’s... READ MORE

There have been significant developments in the litigation surrounding Executive Order 14187 (“Executive Order”), entitled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” which directs agencies and certain federal health care programs to limit access to gender-affirming care to patients under the age of 19 through different measures, including halting federal grant funding that provide... READ MORE

In United States ex rel. O’Connor v. USCC Wireless Investment, Inc., relators filed a qui tam action under the False Claims Act (“FCA”). On February 11, 2025, the D.C. Court of Appeals (the “Court”) affirmed a district court’s ruling that (1) a previous lawsuit had raised substantially the same allegations, triggering the FCA’s public... READ MORE

The Indiana Court of Appeals (the “Court”) in In re: the Civil Commitment of C.R. upheld the trial court’s Order for Regular Commitment, holding sufficient evidence supported the trial court’s finding that C.R. was dangerous to himself and gravely disabled. In re Commitment of C.R., No. 24A-MH-1485, 2024 WL 5153983 (Ind. Ct. App. Dec.... READ MORE

On January 28, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14187 entitled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation” (the “Executive Order”), which sets forth administration policies opposing the provision of gender-affirming care to minors and directs agencies and certain federal health care programs to limit access to such care through measures including halting federal... READ MORE

On March 5, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (the “Sixth Circuit” or “Court”) in Bashaw v. Majestic Care of Whitehall, LLC affirmed the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio’s (the “District Court”) grant of summary judgment, finding the reasons for an employee’s termination were... READ MORE