Author: JGL Law

Representation of client in one of the largest Health Claims Arbitration awards in Maryland, in an obstetrical medical negligence case under Maryland Arbitration Statute – $5,400,000.

Recently, the Government of Canada announced the first major overhaul to its family law system in over 20 years. Bill C-78 passed both houses of Parliament and received formal approval from Canada’s Governor General on June 21, 2019. Unlike the United States, where issues like divorce and child custody are generally handled on a state-by-state basis, Canada has a single federal Divorce Act that governs these issues.

Why Did Canada Need to Change Its System?

Back in May 2018, then-Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould introduced C-78 in Canada’s House of Commons. At the time, Wilson-Raybould said the government’s main objective in updating the Divorce Act and related statutes was to “put children first.” Among other objectives, the government wanted to de-emphasize conflict and litigation in favor of less contentious means of resolving parenting disputes, such as mediation and collaborative law.

To that end, Bill C-78 looks to “simplify certain processes, including those related to family support obligations,” as well as providing additional measures to help Canada’s family court system address cases of domestic violence.

How Will C-78 Implement Changes to Family Law?

Bill C-78 largely replaces the use of the terms “custody,” “custody order,” and “access” in the Divorce Act with language that emphasizes “parenting,” “parenting order,” and “decision-making responsibility” instead. When making a parenting order under the new legislation, a Canadian court must “consider all factors related to the circumstances of the child,” which includes, but not are limited to:

●      the child’s needs, given their age and stage of development, including the need for stability;

●      the nature and strength of the child’s relationship with each parent and other family members, including any siblings or grandparents;

●      the willingness of each parent to support the development and maintenance of the child’s relationship with the other parent;

●      the child’s own views and preferences, giving due weight to their age and maturity;

●      the child’s overall cultural, linguistic, religious, and spiritual life, including their indigenous upbringing and heritage where applicable; and

●      the impact of any previous acts of family violence.

Bill C-78 also creates a new legal distinction between a “simple change” in a child’s residence and a “relocation.” In the latter case, the parent seeking relocation must notify the other parent at least 60 days in advance. If the other parent objects, the parent seeking relocation must obtain a court order.

It should be noted that Bill C-78 is a very complex piece of legislation and not all of its provisions will take effect immediately. The Canadian government will publish regulations to implement various provisions of the law over the next year or so.

What Has the Feedback Been on Bill C-78?

Although many Canadian family law attorneys supported C-78 in its final form, there has been some notable criticism from advocates of “equal shared parenting” (ESP). According to Ontario’s Law Times, proponents of ESP lobbied Canada’s Senate to amend C-78 to require a “rebuttable presumption” in contested parenting cases. In other words, a 50-50 split of parenting time would be the default position in every child custody dispute.

The Senate did not adopt this amendment and, as the Law Times noted, Canadian law has never recognized the equal parenting presumption. And while supporters point to polling data that suggest there is strong popular support for ESP, one Toronto family law attorney told the Law Times that “there are real problems with the presumption of equal parenting time,” and it can actually invite more litigation, “particularly in situations where there may be high conflict or potential for domestic violence.”

Will the United States follow suit?

As mentioned above, each state enacts its own policies, laws and procedures when it comes to divorce matters.  While there are federal statutes that can control and impact disputes over child custody and support matters there are no such laws that control divorce laws throughout the United States.

Contact Joseph Greenwald & Laake, PA

David Bulitt and Allison McFadden practice in Joseph, Greenwald & Laake’s family law department.

If you have questions about your family law, divorce, or child custody case, our lawyers can help. Please reach out to David, Allison or one of our other family law practitioners to our law firm today to schedule a consultation.

www.jgllaw.com

The Appellate Court of Maryland reversed client’s conspiracy conviction based on a violation of the Fourth Amendment arising from an illegal search of the defendant’s cellular phone.

The appellate decision is available here (PDF).

GREENBELT, MD., January 16, 2020 — Joseph Greenwald & Laake P.A. is pleased to announce that Alyse L. Prawde has been elevated to Senior Counsel.

“We are delighted to promote Alyse to this highly responsible position,” said Burt Kahn, Managing Director. “Among her major contributions to the firm, she has been an outstanding advocate and an asset to our Civil Litigation group.

Alyse L. Prawde is a member of the Firm’s Civil Litigation group. She focuses her practice on representing individuals and businesses in a range of complex litigation matters in state and federal court. Her practice covers civil rights litigation, commercial disputes, employment law (including employment discrimination, wrongful termination, and disputes over non-compete and non-solicitation agreements), appellate representation, and school litigation (including representing victims who are sexually abused or injured by school employees). She was named a Maryland Super Lawyers Rising Star in 2020.

Alyse earned her J.D. in 2014, from the University of Maryland, and in 2011 received a B.A. degree from the College of William & Mary.

About Joseph Greenwald & Laake

For more than 40 years, Joseph Greenwald & Laake has worked with individuals and businesses in Maryland and the District of Columbia, taking on the most complex of legal issues with sophisticated counsel and a personal touch. JGL serves clients in virtually all areas of the law.

DOJ FILES COMPLAINT, JOINING WHISTLEBLOWER CASE AGAINST

INDIANA HOSPITAL SYSTEM COMMUNITY HEALTH NETWORK

INDIANAPOLIS, IN – January 7, 2020– The Court unsealed a False Claims Act lawsuit on December 23, 2019, filed by seasoned healthcare finance and operations executive Thomas Fischer against Indianapolis based Community Health Network. Fischer is a whistleblower, filing under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act. His complaint alleges that Community paid physician kickbacks for years in a variety of forms to encourage them to steer patients to Community’s hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers and other facilities.

On behalf of the federal government, the Department of Justice partially joined the lawsuit in August and filed its own complaint this week. It methodically details alleged kickback schemes related to physician compensation totaling many tens of millions of dollars citing critical witness testimony to bolster its claims.

Both federal and state law prohibit payments of any kind – including inflated salaries and lucrative investment opportunities – to physicians to influence where the physicians treat or refer patients. Fischer’s whistleblower and retaliation complaint alleges that Community did just that – paying doctors substantial kickbacks in the form of inflated salaries, bonuses and investment opportunities to get them to send unwitting patients to Community’s hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers and other facilities instead of to competing healthcare providers. The total number of patients affected will be investigated in the litigation.   

Mr. Fischer’s litigation team includes veteran whistleblower and employment attorneys who look forward to prosecuting the case alongside the government in a public-private partnership.

“The government’s intervention demonstrates how seriously it takes the allegations Tom Fischer raised,” said Jay P. Holland, lead counsel for Mr. Fischer. Fischer’s Indianapolis–based attorney Kathleen DeLaney added, “as the case goes forward, we look forward to continuing to work with the government to hold Community Health Network responsible for any illegal and retaliatory conduct.”

Mr. Fischer’s other counsel, Tim McCormack and Veronica Nannis, described the laws at issue. “Congress passed the Anti-Kickback Statute and Stark Law because studies showed that doctors often ordered more, often medically unnecessary, services if they had improper financial incentives,” explained McCormack. Nannis added, “prosecuting these cases is about protecting patients. When hospitals lock up referrals by paying kickbacks, they don’t have to compete for patients by offering lower cost, higher quality care and responsive customer service.”  

Mr. Fischer praised the government’s investigation. “I am grateful for all the hard work the Department of Justice invested in investigating these issues,” said Mr. Fischer. “At its core, the problems I reported are not about arcane financial dealings; they affect real lives of patients, hospital employees and the excessive cost of healthcare services in the Indianapolis marketplace.”   

The case is captioned U.S. and State of Indiana ex rel Fischer v. Community Health Network, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-1215-RLY-DKL. Mr. Fischer is represented by a team of attorneys including Jay Holland, Veronica Nannis and Sarah Chu from Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, Tim McCormack from Van Meer & Belanger and Kathleen DeLaney from DeLaney & DeLaney LLC in Indianapolis. The government’s team is led by Arthur DiDio of the U.S. Department of Justice, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana, Josh Minkler, and Civil Chief for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Indiana, Shelese Woods.   

Representation of a client in an obstetrical malpractice case which resulted in $5,000,000 settlement.

Michael Dano Jackley, founder of the business law and tax department at Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA, died Sunday, December 22, 2019, in Winchester, Virginia.

Mr. Jackley, a Baltimore native, was 77 years old. He joined the Prince George’s County firm in 1973 when the firm decided to expand its litigation based practice to business. He later added to his department and expanded its practice to include estate planning. He was a partner at the firm for 32 years, having been so elected after just three years of employment there.

Mr. Jackley was a graduate of the University of Maryland (political science) and attended the University of Maryland School of Law at night while working full time as a financial analyst for the Internal Revenue Service. He then attended the George Washington National  Law Center, again as a night student, earning a master’s degree in corporate law with highest honors.

Mr. Jackley, known for his humor and love of music, represented a wide variety of local,  regional, and national business clients, ranging from actress Tippi Hedron, to singers Peaches and Herb, to numerous businesses including medical practices, accounting firms, builders, printers, and major government contractors.

Before his retirement in 2008 due to heart issues, Mr. Jackley was named as among Washington’s top tax attorneys by Washingtonian Magazine five times and as one of the top local business attorneys by Baltimore Magazine.

In his retirement, Mr. Jackley was active in the Loudon Fairfax Survivors of Traumatic Brain Injuries.

Mr. Jackley is survived by his wife, Karen K. Jackley, of Middleburg, Virginia, whom he married in 1987, a daughter Megan of Seattle and two grandsons, and two step-daughters.

A celebration of Mr. Jackley’s life will be held in Middleburg, Virginia, in mid-January 2020.

Upheld the then largest ever verdict against Prince George’s County in police abuse case; established new cause of action for pattern or practice of constitutional violations under Maryland Constitution. Prince George’s County v. Longtin (Md. 2011)

Maryland – The 2020 edition of Maryland, Super Lawyers magazine recently named 13 Joseph Greenwald & Laake, P.A. attorneys to its annual Maryland, Super Lawyers lists.

Among which Patrick W. Dragga was listed as one of the lawyers who ranked top in the 2020 Maryland Super Lawyers (Top 100). 

The Maryland, attorneys who made this year’s Super Lawyers list, including their primary practice areas as identified by Super Lawyers, are:

GREENBELT, MD –

• Andrew E. Greenwald –  Medical Malpractice: Plaintiff

• Burt M. Kahn – Medical Malpractice: Plaintiff

• Jay P. Holland – Labor & Employment

• Steven M. Pavsner – Medical Malpractice: Plaintiff

• Timothy F. Maloney – Gen Litigation 

• Walter E. Laake – Medical Malpractice: Plaintiff

ROCKVILLE, MD – 

• David M. Bulitt – Family Law

• Jeffrey N. Greenblatt – Family Law

• Patrick W. Dragga – Family Law 

• P. Lindsay Parvis – Family Law 

• Anne E. Grover – Family Law

RISING STAR  – 

• Alyse Prawde – Civil Litigation: Plaintiff 

• Rama Taib-Lopez – Family Law

• Christopher R. Castellano – Family Law

Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The selection process includes independent research, peer nominations and peer evaluations.

About Joseph Greenwald & Laake

For more than 40 years, Joseph Greenwald & Laake has worked with individuals and businesses in Maryland and the District of Columbia, taking on the most complex of legal issues with sophisticated counsel and a personal touch. JGL serves clients in virtually all areas of the law.

After more than four decades of serving his clients in the Washington, DC, area, one of our founding partners, Walter Laake has decided to retire from the practice of law effective October 30, 2019.

As one of the area’s preeminent personal injury lawyers over the years, Walter won sizeable verdicts for countless individuals who suffered serious injuries and helped to establish many landmark legal precedents. He had a very creative approach to some of the legal problems our clients faced.

He served as the managing director of our Firm, for many years. In his spare time, he served as Prince George’s County Bar Association’s President as well as serving as President of the Maryland Association of Justice (known at the time as The Maryland Trial Lawyers Association)

We stand ready to continue in Walter’s footsteps and to provide the highest quality legal services to the people of Maryland and beyond.

Successfully obtained a settlement on behalf of 13 children who had been sexually abused by a teacher’s aide at Sylvania Woods Elementary School in Prince George’s County.

US Department of Justice Files Complaint Against Surgeon in JGL Whistleblower Case

Claims Surgeon Received Kickbacks, Performed Unnecessary

Spinal Surgeries, Resulting in Patient Harm

Last month, we reported here that we represent two surgeons who stepped forward as whistleblowers by filing  a lawsuit against Sanford Health in South Dakota and Sanford neurosurgeon Wilson Asfora, M.D. Sanford Health recently settled its portion of the lawsuit for more than $20 million. The lawsuit alleged that Sanford Health had failed to take appropriate corrective action to prevent illegal kickbacks and unnecessary spine surgeries performed by spinal surgeon Wilson Asfora. The case received widespread local and national media attention.

With the hospital having settled and entered into a Corporate Integrity Agreement requiring continued monitoring by the federal government, on November 13, the latest development in this case emerged when the US Department of Justice filed a detailed 83-page  complaint  against remaining defendants, Dr. Asfora and his physician-owned distributorship, Medical Designs.

The Justice Department’s complaint claims that Dr. Asfora performed medically unnecessary spinal surgeries on Medicare and Medicaid patients at Sanford Health in order to profit from the devices he manufactured and used in those surgeries. Dr. Asfora’s activities violated federal anti-kickback laws, the complaint alleges, and as a result of some of those surgeries, patients were paralyzed or were forced to endure surgeries on the wrong body site.

JGL’s Veronica Nannis and Jay Holland proudly represent the whistleblower surgeons who initially brought this case to the federal government in 2016 after countless efforts to correct the issue internally failed. “The allegations in this case are incredibly serious, and we are grateful to the government for stepping into this case to partner with us,” said Ms. Nannis.

While the hospital settled its portion of the case, the federal government, alongside Nannis, Holland and their clients, continue to pursue the civil case against the doctor and his companies. For  media coverage of the Justice Department’s filing, see this article from the Sioux Falls Argus Leader.

Earlier this year, the hospital announced that it was suspending the purchase of devices sold by Dr. Asfora’s device companies. It has since announced the termination of Dr. Asfora from the hospital system.