Boies Schiller Partner Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Cancer Treatment Provider
Attorney Luis Suarez represents doctors suing their former employer, 21st Century Oncology, claiming the company illegally controls the market for radiation oncology treatment in southwest Florida.
March 21, 2019 at 03:48 PM
4 minute read
A federal lawsuit accuses cancer treatment company 21st Century Oncology of violating antitrust laws and illegally cornering southwest Florida's radiation oncology market by using restrictive noncompete agreements and a bonus-driven referral system.
Doctors who recently left 21st Century Oncology filed the complaint in the Middle District of Florida on March 15 claiming anti-competitive tactics are used in Collier, Lee and Charlotte counties.
The suit contends the company has agreements with Lee Memorial Health System and Naples Community Hospital showing “specific intent to monopolize the market for the provision of radiation oncology services” for patients covered by public and private insurance plans.
The plaintiffs allege the company has asserted control of the health care market through incentives to in-house physicians who refer patients for radiation treatment. One example listed is the creation of a bonus pool.
“Doctors at 21st Century Oncology who refer their patients for assorted diagnostic radiology or imaging tests … are entitled to participate in the imaging pool, which is funded through a percentage of the profits of all the imaging done at 21st Century Oncology,” the complaint said.
Luis Suarez, a partner with Boies Schiller Flexner's Miami office, is part of the team representing Drs. Arie Dosoretz, Amy Fox, James Rubenstein and Michael Katin in their legal action against the Fort Myers-based company.
“They are bringing the action for improperly maintaining a monopoly over the provision of radiation oncology services,” Suarez said. “They are maintaining that monopoly through extensive anti-competitive conduct in violation of federal antitrust laws.”
The seven-count complaint accuses 21st Century Oncology of violating the Sherman Antitrust Act in an effort to monopolize radiation treatment in the region south of the Tampa Bay area. The company bills itself as the nation's largest radiation oncology provider employing or affiliated with 947 physicians.
The filing seeks declaratory relief and the cancellation of noncompete agreements, arguing they perpetuate a company stranglehold on the market.
“What we hope to achieve in these counties is excellent patient care,” Suarez said. Co-counsel Ernest Marquart and Michele Hintson with the Tampa office of Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.
Read the complaint:
A spokesman for 21st Century Oncology told the Daily Business Review the company “believes that the case has no merit and intends to vigorously defend the allegations.”
“These allegations are an attempt at distraction related to historical matters that no longer exist,” they said. The doctors are “seeking to circumvent valid noncompete clauses based on allegations of behavior that predates the current ownership and management team.”
The doctors resigned March 15 and filed the lawsuit hours later, the company said. The resignations “will not impact quality patient care or our growth strategy.”
The lawsuit is the latest in a series of tribulations for the company. The founder, Dr. Daniel Dosoretz, stepped down as CEO of the company in 2016 following an extensive data breach and several federal class actions claiming improper billing. Dosoretz left the company on the same day as the other doctors.
21st Century Oncology is now under the leadership of CEO Kim Commins-Tzoumakas following the approval of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization plan. Commins-Tzoumakas was named in a $9 million federal lawsuit filed March 4 by former company executive Andrew Woods seeking back pay for lobbying services.
Related stories:
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 AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Trending Stories
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