Advocates for Justice

Over the past several years we have posted news about the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”).  As attorneys focused on socially just causes, we care about the watchdog agency that was formed to protect the interests of everyday consumers against unscrupulous practices of financial institutions.  The CFPB’s mission becomes that much more important in this era of forced arbitration and contractual class action bans.  In more and more cases the courthouse doors are shut to consumers who have been defrauded by their banks, mortgage companies, payday lenders, and brokerage firms.  Imagine your bank took $500 from your bank account without justification, what are your options?  It used to be that you could band together with other bank customers who had the same thing happen, but in 2018 that is often not the case.  This is one reason that the CFPB is so critically important – in a time when citizens’ rights to hold financial institutions accountable are being trampled, there at least was a government agencies that was designed to help injured consumers. 

The clinical laboratory industry continues to be a hotbed for Medicare and Medicaid fraud, as well as fraud and overbilling in connection with tests covered by private insurance.

On March 20, 2018, in Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that state courts retain jurisdiction over class actions brought under the Securities Act of 1933.  The decision resolves a split among the lower courts and protects pending class actions from removal.

The State of California has finally woken up to the fraudulent practices endemic to the state’s addiction-recovery industry, which rips off insurers and preys upon people at their most vulnerable. The now-multibillion-dollar industry has found a lucrative home in Southern California, which has been dubbed “the Rehab Riviera.”

Potential whistleblowers are sometimes afraid that if they bring their employer’s fraudulent scheme to light, the government will come after them for being involved in the fraud. While certainly possible, it is exceptionally rare. After all, the vast majority of money recovered by the federal government in False Claims Act cases comes from cases initiated by whistleblowers; scaring off whistleblowers would not be good business for the Department of Justice.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday announced that it will review a Seventh Circuit decision finding income from $13.3 million given to employees was taxable.

Direct to consumer genetic testing promises that with a couple dollars and a test tube filled with saliva, anyone has the power to look inside their DNA to assess health risks. In contrast to a traditional genetic test performed and interpreted by a physician, a direct to consumer (DTC) genetic test allows individuals to test themselves and bypass the physician and insurance provider.

Lyme disease is the most common tick-borne disease in the United States. Diagnosis and treatment stir confusion and controversy among patients, doctors, and alternative care providers. Some have capitalized on this confusion, creating a market for laboratory developed tests to diagnose the disease.

Defendants often cite Carter v. Prime Healthcare Paradise Valley LLC (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 396 in support of their argument that the plaintiff’s complaint pleads a cause of action for professional negligence rather than elder abuse.  Defendants often argue that Carter, in effect, altered the law and heightened the pleading requirements for an elder abuse cause of action.  In making this argument, however, defendants misinterpret the Carter holding.  The Carter court did not modify the elements or the pleading requirements for elder abuse under California’s Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act.  In fact, the Carter court stated that it “distill[s]” the requirements of an elder abuse case.  The Carter decision did not, however, increase or enhance Plaintiff’s pleading requirements.  Id. at 406.