Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
From time to time, we receive inquiries or subpoenas from state regulators, state Medicaid Fraud Control units, fiscal intermediaries, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Department of Justice and other government entities regarding various Medicare and Medicaid issues. In addition to the matters discussed below, we are currently responding to subpoenas and administrative demands concerning (a) a civil investigative demand related to call coverage services provided by a cardiology group at one of our Tennessee hospitals and (b) a civil investigative demand related to charges for certain emergency department services at our four New Mexico hospitals. In addition, we are subject to other claims and lawsuits arising in the ordinary course of our business including lawsuits and claims related to billing practices and the administration of charity care policies at our hospitals. Based on current knowledge, management does not believe that loss contingencies arising from pending legal, regulatory and governmental matters, including the matters described herein, will have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position or liquidity of the Company. However, in light of the inherent uncertainties involved in pending legal, regulatory and governmental matters, some of which are beyond our control, and the very large or indeterminate damages sought in some of these matters, an adverse outcome in one or more of these matters could be material to our results of operations or cash flows for any particular reporting period. Settlements of suits involving Medicare and Medicaid issues routinely require both monetary payments as well as corporate integrity agreements. Additionally, qui tam or “whistleblower” actions initiated under the civil False Claims Act may be pending but placed under seal by the court to comply with the False Claims Act’s requirements for filing such suits. In September 2014, the Criminal Division of the United States Department of Justice, or DOJ, announced that all qui tam cases will be shared with their Division to determine if a parallel criminal investigation should be opened. The Criminal Division has also frequently stated an intention to pursue corporations in criminal prosecutions. From time to time, we detect issues of non-compliance with Federal healthcare laws pertaining to claims submission and reimbursement practices and/or financial relationships with physicians. We avail ourselves of various mechanisms to address potential overpayments arising out of these issues, including repayment of claims, rebilling of claims, and participation in voluntary disclosure protocols offered by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Office of the Inspector General. Participating in voluntary repayments and voluntary disclosure protocols can have the potential for significant settlement obligations or even enforcement action.
The following legal proceedings are described in detail because, although they may not be required to be disclosed in this Part II, Item 1 under SEC rules, due to the nature of the business of the Company, we believe that the following discussion of these matters may provide useful information to security holders. This discussion does not include claims and lawsuits covered by medical malpractice, general liability or employment practices insurance and risk retention programs, none of which claims or lawsuits would in any event be required to be disclosed in this Part II, Item 1 under SEC rules.
Shareholder Litigation
Caleb Padilla, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v Community Health Systems, Inc., Wayne T. Smith, Larry Cash, and Thomas J. Aaron . This purported federal securities class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on May 30, 2019. It seeks class certification on behalf of purchasers of our common stock between February 20, 2017 and February 27, 2018 and alleges misleading statements resulted in artificially inflated prices for our common stock. On November 20, 2019, the District Court appointed Arun Bhattacharya and Michael Gaviria as lead plaintiffs in the case. The lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated class complaint on January 21, 2020. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated class complaint on March 23, 2020. That motion is pending. We believe this matter is without merit and will vigorously defend this case.
Padilla Derivative Litigation . Five purported shareholder derivative cases have been filed in two District Courts relating to the factual allegations in the Padilla litigation; namely, Faisal Hussain v. Wayne T. Smith, et al, filed August 12, 2019 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware; Roger Trombley v. Wayne T. Smith, et al, filed August 20, 2019 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee; Susheel Tanjavoor v. Wayne T. Smith, et al., filed August 29, 2019, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware; Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund v. John A. Clerico, et al, filed October 30, 2019, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware; and Kevin Aronson v. Wayne T. Smith, et al , filed April 29, 2020 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. All five seek relief derivatively and on behalf of Community Health Systems, Inc. against certain Company officers and directors based on alleged breaches of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and other acts related to certain Company disclosures in 2017 and 2018 regarding the Company’s adoption of Accounting Standards Update 2014-09, which the Company adopted effective January 1, 2018. The defendants filed a Motion to Stay on October 21, 2020, which is pending.
Other Government Investigations
Florida LIP Program CIDs – On September 14, 2017, our hospital in St. Petersburg, Florida received a CID from the United States Department of Justice for information concerning its historic participation in the Florida Low Income Pool Program. The Low Income
49
Pool Program, or LIP, is a funding pool to support healthcare providers that provide uncompensated care to Florida residents who are uninsured or underinsured. The CID sought documentation related to agreements between the hospital and Pinellas County. On June 13, 2019, an additional ten of our affiliated hospitals in Florida received CIDs related to the same subject matter, along with two CIDs addressed to our affiliated management company and the parent company. We are cooperating fully with this investigation.
Commercial Litigation and Other Lawsuits
Steadfast Insurance Company, et al v. Community Health Systems, Inc., CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc., CHSPSC, LLC and Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC; Community Health Systems, Inc., et al v. Steadfast Insurance Company, et al; Anne Sperling, et al v. Community Insurance Group SPC, Ltd. These cases are filed in the Superior Court for the State of Delaware, the Chancery Court for the State of Delaware, and the First Judicial District Court for the State of New Mexico, respectively, and involve insurance coverage disputes related to a $73 million judgment rendered against Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC in Anne Sperling, et al v. Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC (“Sperling I”) . The first case was brought by Steadfast Insurance Company in Delaware Superior Court seeking a declaration that the Sperling I judgment is not a covered loss as defined by the insurance policies that are the subject of the case. The second case, filed by the Company in Delaware Chancery Court, seeks reformation of the subject policies. The third case (“ Sperling II”) , filed by the plaintiffs in Sperling I , seeks recovery from Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC’s insurers for the judgment awarded the plaintiffs in their separate, previous action against Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC. The Steadfast complaint was served on November 30, 2018. On December 13, 2018, Admiral Insurance Company, Endurance Specialty Insurance Ltd, and Illinois Union Insurance Company moved to intervene in the suit as petitioners. The Company has initiated counterclaims against each insurer in that case, including for bad faith against Steadfast. The Company filed the Community Health Systems complaint on January 22, 2020. Sperling II was filed on July 24, 2019. Plaintiffs amended their complaint to add Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC as a defendant in that action on May 21, 2020, and Pecos Valley of New Mexico, LLC filed a third party action against certain insurer defendants in the case on July 6, 2020. On November 12, 2020, Pecos Valley and one of its insurers reached a settlement with the plaintiffs in Sperling I, and as a result the Sperling I case was dismissed with prejudice on November 19, 2020. The Steadfast, Community Health Systems, Inc. and Sperling II cases remain pending. Trial in the Steadfast and Community Health Systems, Inc. consolidated cases is set for December 13, 2021. The Sperling II case is stayed pending the outcome of Steadfast and Community Health Systems, Inc . We will vigorously defend and prosecute these cases.
Thomas Mason, MD, Steven Folstad, MD and Mid-Atlantic Emergency Medical Associates, PA v Health Management Associates, LLC f/k/a Health Management Associates, Inc., Mooresville Hospital Management Associates d/b/a Lake Norman Regional Medical Center and Statesville HMA, LLC d/b/a Davis Regional Medical Center, Envision Healthcare Corporation f/k/a Emergency Medical Services Corporation, Emcare Holdings, Inc., Emergency Medical Services, LP . This alleged wrongful retaliation case is filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. The plaintiffs allege their agreements with the defendants were terminated in retaliation for plaintiffs’ alleged refusal to admit patients unnecessarily to the defendant hospitals or otherwise perform unnecessary diagnostic testing. The allegations of the complaint relate to time periods prior to the hospitals’ affiliation with the Company. The plaintiffs filed a Third Amended Complaint on April 26, 2019. The defendants filed motions to dismiss, which were granted in part and denied in part on September 5, 2019. Trial of this matter is set for January 3, 2022. We believe these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the case.
Tower Health, f/k/a Reading Health System, et al v CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc., et al . This breach of contract action is pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs allege breaches of an asset purchase agreement in connection with the sale of Pottstown Memorial Medical Center. The alleged breaches regard plaintiffs’ contention that the defendants failed to disclose certain conditions related to the physical plant of the hospital, along with various other alleged breaches of the asset purchase agreement. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on July 22, 2019. Trial for this matter began May 3, 2021, and closing arguments are scheduled to occur on October 5, 2021. We believe these claims are without merit and are vigorously defending the case.
Lancaster County Investors Company, et al v CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc. This breach of fiduciary duty and demand for accounting case is pending in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs are certain minority members of Rose City HMA, LLC, which formerly owned and operated Lancaster Regional Medical Center. The plaintiffs generally claim they are entitled to additional compensation related to the sale of Lancaster Regional Medical Center by Rose City HMA, LLC over and above what they have already received from the proceeds of the sale. We believe these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the case.
Text extracted from the filing as submitted to EDGAR. Formatting, tables and exhibits are simplified for reading; the original document is authoritative for anything you rely on.