The Stark Law
History of the Stark Law
Much like the Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS), the Stark Law was passed to ensure that medical providers make treatment and referral decisions based on the best interests of the patient rather than their own financial interests. A common example of a Stark Law violation is a doctor referring patients to a specific imaging center for an X-ray or CT scan because the doctor has an ownership interest in that facility. Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, PLLC, has significant experience with Stark-based False Claims Act (FCA) cases, including representing hospital executives who blew the whistle on a financially-motivated referral scheme with a physician group.
The Stark Law in Action
Some examples of recent successful Stark-based False Claims Act cases include:
- An Indiana health network paying $345 million to settle allegations that it paid inflated salaries to physicians as a reward for referrals.
- A Michigan hospital system and two physicians agreed to pay over $69 million to resolve numerous FCA allegations, including allegations that the hospital system maintained improper financial relationships with physicians and a physician-owned investment group.
- A Massachusetts eye and ear center agreed to pay over $5.7 million to resolve allegations that physician compensation plans for 44 doctors were structured in a way that created prohibited financial interests in the center.
What Is the Difference Between the Stark Law and Anti-Kickback Statute?
There is overlap between the Stark Law and the AKS, and many prohibited referral arrangements violate both statutes. However, there are also meaningful differences between the two laws; for example:
- The Stark law is a narrower statute. While the AKS can potentially apply to any health care referral that results in payment by the federal government, the Stark Law only applies to referrals by physicians for certain “designated health services” specified in the statute.
- The Stark Law is a “strict liability” statute, meaning a defendant does not have to intend to violate the law to be held liable. In contrast, liability under the AKS requires proving that the defendant intended to violate the law or at least knew that his conduct likely violated the law.
Both Stark and AKS are complicated statutes governed by complex regulations. Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, PLLC has both the requisite knowledge and practical experience to successfully navigate these laws on behalf of whistleblowers.
Contact a Whistleblower Attorney
These descriptions of the Stark Law are general in nature and do not constitute legal advice. Fraud schemes targeting federal dollars are complex and ever-evolving. The attorneys at Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, PLLC, understand the detailed legal requirements and details of these elaborate scams and are happy to discuss any potential matter further. If you would like more information or would like to speak to an attorney at Barrett Johnston Martin & Garrison, PLLC, please contact us for a confidential consultation.