On October 27, 2026, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Massachusetts announced that six SNG dialysis centers in Texas agreed to pay approximately $2 million to resolve False Claims Act allegations tied to the Provider Relief Fund. The centers admit they had closed or sold operations before reporting to HRSA, then reported zero revenue. Andrew Hillman walks through why a true number placed in the wrong context drew FCA exposure, how the Escobar half-truth theory fits, and a six-point checklist for any federal report filed after a sale or closure. Hosted by Andrew Jonathan Hillman, Dallas, Texas. Read the Letter: https://thehillmanletter.substack.com/p/zero-was-true-the-claim-was-still Main site: https://andrew-hillman.com/ Takeaways: - The centers admit each had stopped operating or sold its operations before reporting to HRSA, and each reported zero revenue. - Per the release, that created the false implication that the pandemic, not a pre-arranged sale or closure, drove revenue to zero. - The United States contends the centers submitted false claims for payment and false statements material to a false claim (31 U.S.C. 3729(a)(1)(A) and (B)). - Escobar: half-truths are representations that state the truth only so far as it goes while omitting critical qualifying information. - Sankar Nephrology Group, the majority owner, guarantees the settlement payment. - Federal reporting duties tied to past funding do not end at closing. Chapters: 0:00 Cold open 0:22 What happened 2:32 Why it matters 5:20 Practical checklist 6:58 My take 7:36 Disclaimer and close Sources: USAO-MA press release, Oct 27, 2026: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/dialysis-centers-agree-pay-2-million-resolve-allegations-provider-relief-fund-fraud False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. 3729 (GovInfo): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2023-title31/html/USCODE-2023-title31-subtitleIII-chap37-subchapIII-sec3729.htm Universal Health Services v. United States ex rel. Escobar, 579 U.S. 176 (2016), bound volume (PDF): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/579bv.pdf This episode is educational commentary and is not legal advice. Andrew Hillman is not an attorney. Talk to qualified counsel about your specific situation. The claims resolved in this settlement are allegations, except for facts the parties admitted. Narrated by an AI voice (synthetic narration). No real person's voice or likeness is used. Links and resources: The Letter: https://thehillmanletter.substack.com/p/zero-was-true-the-claim-was-still Podcast home: https://andrew-hillman.com/podcast/ About the host: https://andrew-hillman.com/who-is-andrew-jonathan-hillman/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hillman-dallas The Hillman Letter on Substack: https://thehillmanletter.substack.com Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-hillman-letter-podcast/id6825615190 YouTube playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLElpO9MC9VC4 Academia.edu, SMU: https://smu.academia.edu/AndrewHillman ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5396-321X Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Jonathan_Hillman Book a call: https://calendly.com/ajhusa Educational only. Not legal advice. Not an attorney.
続きを読む
一部表示
2026/11/048 分