Lawyers Get Big Bite of $236M Settlement Over Orthodontic Work Coverage
The settlement agreement called for “the Conduent defendants” to pay the state a total of nearly $236 million. That includes more than $212 million for reimbursement and almost $24 million for attorneys' fees, costs and legal expenses.
February 21, 2019 at 02:30 PM
4 minute read
The $236 million settlement this week of a lawsuit with a onetime Xerox subsidiary over Medicaid-paid orthodontic expenses underscores what many parents already know: Braces are expensive.
Lawyers involved said it was the largest single resolution in history for a Medicaid lawsuit filed by the Texas Attorney General's Office. They said the state spent more than $1 billion on orthodontics under the Texas Medicaid program during the same time frame. The trouble is, as Attorney General Ken Paxton noted, the Medicaid program “does not cover braces for cosmetic purposes.”
Paxton sued the companies the state had hired to administer the program, Xerox and its former subsidiaries, including Conduent Inc. Paxton alleged the companies “rubber stamped orthodontic prior authorization requests” without making sure they were reviewed by “qualified clinical personnel” as required. “As a result, expensive, taxpayer-funded orthodontic work was performed on thousands of children who either didn't meet the Medicaid standard for braces or didn't require treatment,” Paxton said.
Paxton and Conduent announced their settlement Tuesday, without any admission of wrongdoing. The settlement agreement called for “the Conduent defendants” to pay the state a total of nearly $236 million. That includes more than $212 million for reimbursement and almost $24 million for attorney fees, costs and legal expenses.
One day later, attorneys for the whistleblowers who sued over the same issues two years ahead of the state asked the court for their share. A joint motion for determination of the relators' share and expenses, attorney fees and costs was filed Wednesday in the 53rd Judicial District Court of Travis County.
The legal team for the relators includes: Rusty Tucker and the Law Office of James R. Tucker in Dallas; Mike Tibbals of Dallas; Ketan Kharod of Guerrero & Whittle in Austin; Charles Siegel and Caitlyn Silhan of Waters & Kraus in Dallas; Daniel Hargrove of the Hargrove Law Firm in San Antonio; and James Moriarty of the Law Office of James Moriarty in Houston. They said in a joint statement that their clients were former employees of dental offices that had provided orthodontic care to children whose families were in the Medicaid program.
“They faced vicious legal attacks in their courageous effort to set the record straight,” the lawyers said. They said the settlement “vindicated” the whistleblowers.
Asked to comment on the settlement, a spokesman for Xerox shared a statement from the company.
“The State of Texas sued several companies, including Conduent and its former parent, Xerox, for alleged losses between 2004 and 2014 related to the day-to-day management of a services contract for Medicaid-covered dental care. The original 2003 contract was between subsidiaries of ACS, Inc. (now Conduent) and the State of Texas and was signed before Xerox acquired ACS in 2010. Xerox was not responsible for performing services under the contracts and was not involved in the management of the contract or the services provided to the State. The parties have now agreed to a settlement whereby Conduent will pay the State over $235.9M. Xerox will not make any payment as part of the settlement.”
Conduent posted a statement on its website.
“All of these allegations relate to the 2004-2014 time period, when the company was owned by predecessor companies. In the settlement agreement, Conduent denied any improper actions occurred during the performance of the two contracts,” the company said.
“We are pleased to put this legacy issue behind us. This settlement provides clarity on the financial impact and we have sufficient liquidity to address it,” Conduent CEO Ashok Vemuri said. “Texas remains an important client for us and we are focused on continuing to bring value to our client and its citizens.”
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 AllLatham & Watkins Successfully Defend Patents at the ITC for Cosmetic Devices
3 minute readHouston Appeals Court Split Over Race Discrimination Suit Involving COVID-19 Vaccine Distribution
4 minute readAttorney General Seeks Permanent Injunction Against Abortion-Related Telemedicine
2 minute readBig Tech and Internet Companies Slammed With Consumer Class Actions in December
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