Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Business Crimes Hotline
FLORIDA
Executives Convicted in Medicare Fraud Scheme
On June 28, 2013, a federal jury convicted four Hollywood Pavilion mental health care hospital executives for their involvement in a Medicare fraud scheme.
Prosecutors demonstrated that the defendants, along with co-conspirators, submitted fraudulent claims to Medicare through Hollywood Pavilion and that the defendants also paid bribes and kickbacks in order to have patients referred to their facility despite the fact that those patients did not qualify for psychiatric treatment.
In furtherance of this fraud, Hollywood Pavilion's CEO, along with other Hollywood Pavilion directors, falsified documents in order to conceal the scheme. Hollywood Pavilion carried out this scheme from 2003 through August 2012 and billed Medicare almost $70 million for services that were never rendered.
'
WASHINGTON, DC
China-Based Company and CEO Charged in Cross-Border Working Group Case
On June 20, 2013, the SEC charged China MediaExpress, a China-based advertising company, for falsely reporting business increases. The SEC alleges that this false reporting began almost immediately after China MediaExpress went public in October 2009. For instance, in the company's 2009 annual report, the company represented that it had $57 million in cash on hand when, in reality, the company had only $141,000 on hand. Not only did China MediaExpress allegedly significantly overstate its cash balances, but the company also released false information regarding its client list. The SEC's complaint alleges that, as a result of these material misrepresentations, China MediaExpress's stock tripled in value.
The company's CEO, motivated by stock incentives, allegedly directed the fraud. In order to make it appear as though the company met certain net income goals, the SEC alleges that the company, at the direction of its CEO, engaged in fraudulent accounting practices that included both fraudulent bank confirmations and statements that resulted in inflated cash balance reports.
As a result of these alleged practices, the SEC charged China MediaExpress and its CEO with violations of the antifraud provisions of the federal securities law. Additionally, China MediaExpress has been charged with violating reporting, books, records, and internal control provisions of the federal securities law. The SEC has also charged the company's CEO with violating provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act prohibiting lying to auditors and making false certifications. The SEC is seeking an officer and director bar against China MediaExpress's CEO and is seeking financial penalties, injunctive relief, and disgorgement against China MediaExpress.'
'
FLORIDA
Executives Convicted in Medicare Fraud Scheme
On June 28, 2013, a federal jury convicted four Hollywood Pavilion mental health care hospital executives for their involvement in a Medicare fraud scheme.
Prosecutors demonstrated that the defendants, along with co-conspirators, submitted fraudulent claims to Medicare through Hollywood Pavilion and that the defendants also paid bribes and kickbacks in order to have patients referred to their facility despite the fact that those patients did not qualify for psychiatric treatment.
In furtherance of this fraud, Hollywood Pavilion's CEO, along with other Hollywood Pavilion directors, falsified documents in order to conceal the scheme. Hollywood Pavilion carried out this scheme from 2003 through August 2012 and billed Medicare almost $70 million for services that were never rendered.
'
WASHINGTON, DC
China-Based Company and CEO Charged in Cross-Border Working Group Case
On June 20, 2013, the SEC charged China MediaExpress, a China-based advertising company, for falsely reporting business increases. The SEC alleges that this false reporting began almost immediately after China MediaExpress went public in October 2009. For instance, in the company's 2009 annual report, the company represented that it had $57 million in cash on hand when, in reality, the company had only $141,000 on hand. Not only did China MediaExpress allegedly significantly overstate its cash balances, but the company also released false information regarding its client list. The SEC's complaint alleges that, as a result of these material misrepresentations, China MediaExpress's stock tripled in value.
The company's CEO, motivated by stock incentives, allegedly directed the fraud. In order to make it appear as though the company met certain net income goals, the SEC alleges that the company, at the direction of its CEO, engaged in fraudulent accounting practices that included both fraudulent bank confirmations and statements that resulted in inflated cash balance reports.
As a result of these alleged practices, the SEC charged China MediaExpress and its CEO with violations of the antifraud provisions of the federal securities law. Additionally, China MediaExpress has been charged with violating reporting, books, records, and internal control provisions of the federal securities law. The SEC has also charged the company's CEO with violating provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act prohibiting lying to auditors and making false certifications. The SEC is seeking an officer and director bar against China MediaExpress's CEO and is seeking financial penalties, injunctive relief, and disgorgement against China MediaExpress.'
'
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.