Practice Areas
Health Insurance Fraud
Certain unscrupulous companies are willing to take advantage of people by selling health insurance as major medical or comprehensive coverage when, in fact, the policies offer very little coverage at all.
Companies are required to accurately and honestly represent the products that they sell. When a company's misrepresentations cause harm, the company can be held responsible for the damage it causes.
Examples of Health Insurance Fraud Cases
Dana and Doug Christensen, Playa Del Rey, California
Dana and Doug Christensen purchased a health insurance policy from the Mega Life and Health Insurance Company in January 2001. Doug, who was 47 years old, was a bone cancer survivor. The couple specifically questioned their Mega insurance agent regarding whether the policy would protect Doug if his cancer recurred. The Mega agent assured them it would.
When Doug’s cancer did recur, though, the couple learned that most of their hospital expenses were not covered. The couple was left with over $450,000 in uncovered expenses before Doug passed away. In Doug’s last months he begged his wife to divorce him so she would not be stuck with his medical bills, but Dana steadfastly refused.
After Doug’s funeral, Dana was left alone with nearly a half million dollars in unpaid medical bills. The only person who could help her in this situation was a lawyer.
Dana contacted Antony Stuart and asked him to represent her. To the vast majority of attorneys, Dana’s case would have appeared to be about insurance bad faith, but Mr. Stuart was careful. He recognized that the real issue was fraud.
The Stuart Law Firm fought aggressively for Dana’s rights against Mega and its allies, who employed corporate defense attorneys from four other firms, and who resisted at every turn. For Dana Christensen, Stuart Law Firm obtained a public settlement with Mega and its co-defendants in the amount of $1.71 million.
Cheryl Brooks, Franklin, Tennessee
When they met with him to discuss health insurance, Don and Cheryl Brooks carefully explained to Mid-West insurance agent Tom Amstadt that Cheryl had a family history of breast cancer. Amstadt said, "This is the policy you need. It is the best one on the market for catastrophic illness." He put his hand on a presentation book that he had brought with him to the meeting and asked the couple to trust him.
Later, Cheryl was diagnosed with breast cancer. She began to receive "explanation of benefit" forms indicating that Mid-West was covering just a small portion of the bills for her treatment. Cheryl called the company to ask what was happening. Mid-West’s representative informed Cheryl that chemotherapy was very limited under the policy. Cheryl said there must be some mistake. She explained that she had cancer, and that she had bought the policy for just this sort of situation. The representative became testy with Cheryl, then hung up. Cheryl then called Tom Amstadt in tears. Amstadt said he would check into the matter and get back to her. He never did.
Cheryl later called the company to ask how much had been paid toward her treatment. The representative she spoke with said Cheryl should not worry, because she had up to $100,000 in lifetime benefits. Cheryl thought she was correcting the representative when she said, "You mean $1 million, right?" Amstadt had said the policy provided up to $1 million in lifetime benefits. No, the representative said, she had a $100,000 limit on chemotherapy. Already facing $150,000 in uncovered bills, Cheryl realized that if she were to develop cancer in her right breast, Mid-West would not pay for any of the care she would need. So to avoid incurring yet more medical bills that Mid-West would not cover, she had her healthy breast removed too. Cheryl is represented by Stuart Law Firm in a legal action against HealthMarkets/Mid-West and the Alliance for Affordable Services in Fort Worth, Texas.
Howard and Charlotte Woffinden, Los Angeles, California
In February 2004, Howard and Charlotte Woffinden needed to replace their existing Blue Cross group health insurance. Howard found a Web page providing information about a health insurance plan available through the Alliance for Affordable Services and requested additional information. Stephen Casey, an Alliance representative, called and arranged to visit the Woffindens at their home.
At the meeting, Casey said the Alliance was a network of small businesspeople who organized themselves to seek out, select, negotiate, and procure health insurance and other services on favorable terms, on behalf of themselves and Alliance members. He said the Alliance had selected Mid-West as the insurance company of choice for its members.
Howard and Charlotte said they wanted catastrophic coverage. Howard explained that since the Woffindens had no experience with medical problems, and wanted to know from Casey what was good coverage. Casey responded that the policy he offered was equal to or superior to the Woffindens's existing Blue Cross coverage. He said that with the Alliance, members enjoyed substantial discounts based upon prices that were pre-negotiated with medical providers. Casey said that because of the pre-negotiated pricing and discounts, the coverage he recommended would be more than adequate to meet the Woffindens' needs. Charlotte mentioned that she had received care at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Casey responded, "Oh, good, we have huge discounts with Cedars."
Casey never explained that under the Alliance policy, the deductible was not annual, but "per incident," so the Woffindens could be responsible for paying multiple $5,000 deductibles per year. He did not explain that the policy contained no stop-loss provision. He did not disclose that after an initial hospitalization, the policy might provide no coverage for subsequent hospitalizations for the same illness within a 180-day period.
After the Woffindens purchased the policy, Charlotte was diagnosed with cancer. When the Woffindens went to the hospital for their first consultation, an admissions representative bluntly advised them that their health insurance policy was "not worth anything."
The Woffindens were forced to struggle to obtain medical care and treatment for Charlotte's cancer using personal savings. Of $781,927.02 in bills, Mid-West paid just $76,097.15 - under ten percent. Charlotte ultimately succumbed to her cancer, leaving her family with a large debt. Howard is represented by Stuart Law Firm in an action against Mid-West and the Alliance for Affordable Services.
Darlene and Dave Henderson, Penn Valley, California
In April 2000, Darlene and Dave Henderson met with a salesman for the National Association for the Self-Employed who showed them the MEGA plan, which appeared to them to be a group PPO similar to others they had seen. David Henderson required surgery for a life-threatening aneurysm and a subsequent colostomy at a total cost of over $190,000. They learned the policy was not a group policy, and that its maximum benefits were very low in relation to typical medical expenses. MEGA paid just 14% of Dave’s medical expenses. Dave complained to the salesman, who said not to tell anyone. “I could lose my license,” the salesman said. The Hendersons’ case against MEGA and the National Association for the Self-Employed is scheduled for trial in Nevada Superior Court in May 2006. They are represented by Stuart Law Firm.
Linda and Jerry Hopkins, Hawthorne, California
After Jerry and Linda Hopkins purchased their MEGA policy in October 2004, Linda was diagnosed with stage-three ovarian cancer. She underwent surgery at a local medical center, where her bills totaled $250,000. Of this amount, MEGA agreed to cover $20,000. At the medical center, Jerry Hopkins was told there were four others in the cancer ward with the same insurance—and the same problem. Later, when Linda’s cancer returned, the medical center told Jerry it would be unable to provide the treatment she needed because her coverage was so poor. The Hopkins have retained Stuart Law Firm and are asserting a claim for fraud against Mega and the NASE.
Top of Page
Product Liability
In America, we hold companies responsible for the safety of the products they design and manufacture. This keeps the public safe and provides recourse to individuals who suffer injuries as a result of unsafe products.
Americans can recover under the law when a particular brand of tire blows out on the freeway at foreseeable speeds, when a certain toy chokes infants, when a tobacco or asbestos company lies about knowing the dangers associated with its products, or when medical equipment fails to work according to a seller’s specifications.
Top of Page
Defective automobile products
Drivers and passengers need to be confident that air bags and seat belts will work when they are needed. To protect the commuting and traveling public, automobile manufacturers must meet the safety standards for collisions, rollovers, and fires. Those who fail to do so may be held accountable under the law to the people who are injured as a result.
Top of Page
Defective child products
The current tort system in the United States rigorously protects children against unsafe toys, bedding, and car seats. Although there are “tort reform” efforts under way that would remove such protections, today the maker and seller of an unsafe child product can be held responsible in a court of law for any injuries that the product causes.
Top of Page
Defective medical devices
Companies that make and sell pacemakers, catheters, heart or brain stents, and dialysis filters must meet safety standards in order to protect the lives of patients. If it were not possible to hold companies accountable for meeting these standards, a patient who required dialysis would risk acquiring the HIV virus, or another dangerous virus, every time she required treatment. Heart patients whose pacemakers failed unnecessarily would not be able to do anything about it. Fortunately, our tort system permits citizens to hold companies that do not meet such standards accountable before a jury of our peers.
Top of Page
Unsafe drugs
Inadequately tested drugs, or drugs whose safety tests raise red flags that their makers ignore, can kill or severely injure the people who take them. We should be able to have confidence in the drugs our doctors prescribe.
Consumer lawyers, tort laws, and the courts keep your medicine safe by providing you with the ability to hold a drug company accountable if it markets a drug without adequate testing or ignores test results in the rush to market.
Top of Page
Professional Malpractice
Corporate executives who take advantage of society, like those at Enron or WorldCom, must know they are not above the law. We must be able to be have confidence in our lawyers, accountants, doctors, and dentists.
Business owners and professionals are responsible for the caliber of their work. If you suffer as a result of their errors, omissions, or negligence, they can be legally liable to you. You may recover through the legal system if you are damaged by fraud, non-performance, loss of data, or system or product failure.
Stuart Law Firm has decades of experience in this area and enjoys a reputation for successfully litigating complex professional liability cases against corporate directors and officers, lawyers, accountants, mortgage brokers, bankers, dentists, doctors, hospitals and their staffs, optometrists, therapists, mental health workers, appraisers, and real estate professionals.
Top of Page
Insurance Bad Faith
It adds insult to injury when, after suffering the loss of a loved one or a home, your insurance company gives you the runaround, refuses to pay legitimate claims under the terms of your life insurance or homeowner’s policy, and acts inappropriately during the claims process.
If an insurance company subjects you to such abusive treatment, you can use the legal system to protect your rights under the laws and under your contract with the company through a cause of action for insurance bad faith.
Top of Page
Invasion of Privacy
In this age of reality television, “peekaboo” warrants allowing for property searches without informing owners, and electronic communications that can be intercepted and monitored by governments, companies, or criminal organizations, your privacy is under greater threat with every passing day.
Contrary to what many believe, however, your privacy rights are not dead. When an American citizen’s privacy rights are violated, that citizen can hold wrongdoers accountable for the violation in a court of law.
Top of Page
Wrongful Death
A child who loses a working parent through another’s wrongdoing should not have to experience a dramatic decrease in her standard of living. Our tort system provides survivors with the right to recover in court when another’s bad conduct causes the loss of a family member.
Top of Page
Libel and Slander
Your reputation is important. A newspaper cannot knowingly and maliciously publish a false story about someone who is simply going about his daily business. An employer cannot post lies on the company bulletin board in order to set an employee up for a firing.
When another person threatens your reputation with false statements, you may vindicate your reputation and recover for the damage this causes in a court of law.
Top of Page
Negligence
In our society, we owe one another a duty of care. Sometimes, though, people behave in an unreasonable way — even when they know better. If such unreasonable conduct causes you harm, you can recover for the damage you suffer as a result of that behavior in a court of law.
Top of Page
Employment Discrimination
If you are performing on the job and contributing value to your company, no one has a right to deprive you of the fruits of your great work just because you are a woman, or come from another country, or go to a particular church. When an employer discharges or refuses to promote an employee on grounds such as these, the employee has a right to recover in a court of law.
Employees who take a stand in court against employers who discriminate do not only recover for their own injuries. They benefit society at large by deterring such employers from continuing to discriminate in the future.
Top of Page
Sexual Harassment
You have a right to freedom from sexual harassment at work. You have a right to advance in your career without requests for sexual favors.
Unwanted sexual attention can create an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. Verbal and physical conduct of a sexual nature can place your job, pay, or career at risk. The law does not require you to stand for such treatment. If you experience sexual harassment as you attempt to go about your work, you can hold those responsible for their misconduct in a court of law.
Top of Page
Premises Liability
The law holds property owners responsible to ensure that their premises are reasonably safe. An owner who knows about an unreasonably dangerous condition on her property, but does nothing about it, can be legally liable if another person is hurt as a result.
Top of Page