| News News Archive  Email A Friend
April 19, 2024
Workers Compensation Bill 2024: One percent of employee’s salary to contribute to workers’ compensation fund in Kenya. April 15, 2024
Colorado Worker Shows Head Injury Happened as a Consequence of a Knock on the Head at Work April 4, 2024
Callfornia Division of Workers' Compensation Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee Meeting Scheduled for April 17, 2024 April 3, 2024
California Division of Workers' Compensation Posts Adjustments to Official Medical Fee Schedule (DMEPOS)
| | No Answer From The California Supreme Court Yet On Landmark Medical Case In Orange County
By Lonce LaMon - April 29, 2015
It is predicted that no hearing will take place on this Friday, May 1st 2015, as was set on the calendar, for the Landmark Medical case in Orange County Superior Court. This is because no response has been received as of this day, April 29th 2015, from the California Supreme Court.
The defense led by lawyer Benjamin Gluck, defense counsel for the CEO of Landmark Medical, Kareem Ahmed, appealed to the California Supreme Court over the defense’s denied demurrers. Both the prosecution and the defense filed their arguments on April 17th 2015 to that high court.
The Supreme Court wanted both sides to express why they should or should not hear this case. Naturally, the prosecution sent their arguments as to why they should not hear the case, and the defense why they should. But the Supreme Court has not yet answered as to whether they will agree to do a review. They have merely stayed the Superior Court proceedings while they decide if they will review.
In the court room of the Honorable Thomas Goethals, the demurrers were denied on January 16th 2015. Judge Goethals allowed for a second amendment of the Complaint, but not a dismissal of the Complaint itself and a retreat back to the Grand Jury. The demurrers in essence were basing their challenges
|
Nit picking form... could be a method of burning time and litigating the case to death. |
upon the form in which the charges were alleged, not upon the content. Judge Goethals stated in open court on January 16th that California is “very forgiving” and that the prosecution has the right to amend the Complaint once again for its form.
Goethals further expressed that the defense needs to focus their further arguments on the content of the case, and not entirely upon its form.
Nit picking form, ad nauseum, in the conjecture of this writer, could be a method of burning time and litigating the case to death. And the defense, it can be further conjectured, has the money and therefore can afford to litigate to the high heavens.
Of course this is money that was charged to the workers’ compensation claims payers in California and paid to Landmark Medical for expensive compounded medications which were unjustified medically to be prescribed to workers’ compensation patients. This Landmark case involves 200 million dollars in alleged workers’ compensation fraud and charges that 25 million dollars in kick-backs were paid to physicians to prescribe compounded medications illegally manufactured by Landmark Medical and its hired pharmacy partners.
A date for further proceedings has not yet been determined. An answer from the California Supreme Court is what is immediately anticipated.
By journalist Lonce LaMon; lonce@adjustercom.com Copyright by Lonce LaMon and adjustercom. All rights reserved.
PLEASE COMMENT ON FACEBOOK AT: www.facebook.com/adjustercom
|
__May11th2017.gif)
.gif)