Miami Hospital Ordered to Pay $12M to Doctors After 'Squeeze-Out' Merger
Kendall Regional Medical Center undervalued three physicians' ownership shares by millions of dollars, a Miami-Dade judge found.
January 16, 2018 at 04:05 PM
4 minute read
Kendall Regional Medical Center was ordered to pay about $11.6 million to three doctors after undervaluing their limited partnership shares during a 2014 “squeeze-out” merger.
The hospital's aggressive growth made the ownership interests — purchased in 1991 for $15,000 each — worth more than $3 million apiece, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Jorge Cueto ruled in a final judgment entered Jan. 10. The valuation was more than triple what the doctors were initially offered when they were pushed out of the partnership.
Hospital Corp. of America Inc., once run by now-Gov. Rick Scott, formed the limited partnership in the '90s. Drs. Rafael Madrigal, Juan Suarez and Jorge Suarez-Menendez bought in early and declined buyout offers over the years. In December 2014, a shell company was created to merge with the HCA-owned general partner to “squeeze out” the minority shareholders.
“The squeeze-out was timed to remove them right as Kendall was about to embark on significant expansion,” said Miami attorney Michael Pineiro of Marcus Neiman & Rashbaum. He and colleague Daniel Rashbaum represented the doctors.
Cueto ruled the business valuation expert who helped set the initial offers at $1.1 million each, Colin McDermott, drove down the amount by assuming a big drop in growth and a high risk based on the loss of Affordable Care Act health care exchange patients.
But Kendall Regional saw expansive growth in the years leading up to the merger, with revenue increasing from $258 million in 2011 to $348 million in 2014, the judge found after a bench trial. Before the reorganization, the hospital's plans included the addition of a Level II trauma center and a Level III neonatal intensive care unit.
Cueto dismissed McDermott's assumption that — after 20 percent growth in 2015 — the hospital would experience 5 percent growth the next year, followed by three years of 2 percent growth.
“It is unreasonable to assume, and there is no evidence showing, that Kendall's earnings growth for Years 2-5 will decline as precipitously as projected by Mr. McDermott from Year 1,” Cueto ruled.
McDermott's risk assumption for the loss of ACA patients also had no quantitative support, the judge ruled, and “was not tied to the severity or likelihood of the underlying risks. Rather, it was outcome-driven.”
The judge ruled the defense expert plugged in a risk number that would bring the total valuation to about five times the hospital's earnings. That was the company's standard amount for buyout offers, according to Pineiro.
Cueto decided to go with plaintiffs expert Viresh Dayal's valuation of $3.34 million per ownership interest, which assumed 10 percent growth for four years after 2015. He also tacked on about $517,000 in prejudgment interest per plaintiff, bringing each doctor's award to about $3.86 million.
“We believe we offered fair value and are therefore disappointed with the ruling,” Kendall Regional said in a statement. “We have filed a notice of appeal.”
The hospital was represented by Miami attorneys Walter Tache and Marissel Descalzo of Tache, Bronis, Christianson and Descalzo and Yolanda Strader of Carlton Fields.
Pineiro said he believes the doctors' decision to challenge the appraisal under the Florida Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act may inspire others to search for faulty risk assumptions underlying similar offers.
“The use of that type of assumption is probably widespread in terms of hospitals or larger companies trying to take advantage of a party with less bargaining power,” Pineiro said. “That's what I think happened here. These physicians just happened to not accept what was offered to them, even though it was a hefty buyout.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Tampa Jury Returns $5.8M Verdict Against Insurer Who Denied Coverage
2 minute readEven the Chief Judge Noted the Cost of This Broward Case
Marriott's $52M Data Breach Settlement Points to Emerging Trend
Trending Stories
- 1Reminder: Court Rules and Statutes Apply to Pendente Lite Custody Decisions
- 2Consumer Cleared to Proceed With Claims Against CVS 'Non-Drowsy' Medication, Judge Says
- 3Ex-Schnader Partner Nears Settlement in Misappropriated Comp Class Action
- 4The Increase in Artificial Intelligence-Related Securities Class Actions
- 5Trump’s DOE Pick Could Spell Trouble for Title IX Enforcement, Higher Ed Funding
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250