CVS Settles Fraud Allegations with the US, Multiple States & Cities
Post 5246
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gWPTErTV, see the video at https://lnkd.in/gcmb4USM and at https://lnkd.in/gZcEHcZ9, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5200 posts.
False Claims Act Claims Resolved by CVS
In United States Of America v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. et al, Nos. 18 Civ. 3047 (JGK), 19 Civ. 1550 (JGK), 19 Civ. 8454 (JGK), 19 Civ. 11244 (JGK), 20 Civ. 2173 (JGK), 18 Civ. 3047 (JGK), United States District Court, S.D. New York (December 1, 2025) Honolable John G. Koeltl United States District Judge concluded that Relators filed the above-captioned multiple actions against defendant CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (“CVS”) and other entities on behalf of the United States under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq., on behalf of 30 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands under comparable state false claims and insurance fraud laws, and on behalf of six municipalities under comparable municipal false claims laws, which were designated as “related” pursuant to the Local Rules of this Court (collectively, the “Actions”).
Under the settlement approved by the court CVS agreed to pay a total sum of $37.76 million, with $24,446,240 to be paid to the United States and the remainder to be paid to various states. As part of the settlement, CVS also admitted and accepted responsibility for certain conduct alleged by the Government in its complaint, including that GHPs paid CVS substantial amounts for insulin pen refills that were ineligible for reimbursement and CVS pharmacies dispensed more insulin to GHP beneficiaries than they needed.
The US Attorney noted that “CVS engaged in a decade-long practice of repeatedly prematurely refilling insulin prescriptions for patients and improperly billing government healthcare programs for more insulin than patients needed… These programs rely on pharmacies to follow appropriate refill schedules and to accurately report the amount of medicine dispensed, which CVS pharmacies frequently failed to do.”
The USDC concluded that on or about May 5, 2025, the Plaintiff States, with the exception of the California Department of Insurance, filed a Notice of Decision to Decline Intervention, notifying the Court of their decisions to decline intervention in these Actions (the “State Notice of Declination”).
On or about October 1, 2025, relator RJA, LLP, filed a notice voluntarily dismissing without prejudice claims it asserted on behalf of five Plaintiff Municipalities (the “RJA Notice of Municipal Claims Dismissal”), and on or about October 15, 2025, the Court issued an Order granting RJA, LLP’s motion to voluntarily dismiss without prejudice claims it asserted on behalf of the City of Chicago (the “RJA Chicago Claims Dismissal Order”).
The United States filed a Complaint-in-Intervention (the “Government Complaint”) against CVS; and the United States, CVS, and Relators have entered into a Stipulation and Order of Settlement and Dismissal (the “Settlement”);
Since the United States and Relators have entered into a Stipulation and Order of Settlement and Release Between the United States and Relators (the “Relator Stipulation”) it was ordered that:
The seals were lifted as to the Government Notice of Partial Intervention, the State Notice of Declination, the RJA Notice of Municipal Claims Dismissal, the RJA Chicago Claims Dismissal Order, the Government Complaint, the Settlement, the Relator Stipulation, and the complaints and any amended complaints filed by Relators in these Actions and the settlement was approved.
ZALMA OPINION
Multiple CVS entities across the country were sued by “Relators” in a Qui Tam suit that was joined by the US Government, several states and cities for violation of the False Claims Act. The various parties agreed with the CVS entities and pharmacies and presented the agreement to the court which decided to approve the settlement and provide the US Treasury and state and city treasuries with funds they did not have.
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the InsuranceClaims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk.
Anti-Public Adjuster Clause Is Effective in New York
Post number 5301
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/public-adjusters-attempt-represent-insured-subject-zalma-esq-cfe-rubfc, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Insurers May Contractually Prevent an Insured from Hiring a Public Adjuster
In Peter Barbato & North Jersey Public Adjusters Inc. v. Interstate Fire & Casualty Company, et al, No. 25-cv-5312 (JGK), United States District Court, S.D. New York (December 15, 2025) the plaintiffs, Peter Barbato and North Jersey Public Adjusters, Inc. (“NJPA”), filed suit against several insurance companies, including Interstate Fire & Casualty Company, Independent Specialty Insurance Company, and certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London.
FACTS
NJPA is a New Jersey-based public adjusting firm licensed in New York. The dispute centers on ...
Anti-Public Adjuster Clause Is Effective in New York
Post number 5301
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/public-adjusters-attempt-represent-insured-subject-zalma-esq-cfe-rubfc, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Insurers May Contractually Prevent an Insured from Hiring a Public Adjuster
In Peter Barbato & North Jersey Public Adjusters Inc. v. Interstate Fire & Casualty Company, et al, No. 25-cv-5312 (JGK), United States District Court, S.D. New York (December 15, 2025) the plaintiffs, Peter Barbato and North Jersey Public Adjusters, Inc. (“NJPA”), filed suit against several insurance companies, including Interstate Fire & Casualty Company, Independent Specialty Insurance Company, and certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London.
FACTS
NJPA is a New Jersey-based public adjusting firm licensed in New York. The dispute centers on ...
Proof of Highly Contaminated Water is Required for Extra Payments
Post number 5300
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/acting-your-own-lawyer-foolish-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-mbg0c, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Acting as Your Own Lawyer is Foolish
Evidence of Breach of Contract Survives Dismissal of All Other Charges
In Lee Lifeng Hsu and Jane Yuchen Hsu v. State Farm Fire And Casualty Company, C. A. No. N24C-09-020 CLS, Superior Court of Delaware (February 27, 2026) a claim to State Farm who paid approximately $61,000 after assessments but denied coverage for additional items including ceramic tiles, the kitchen floor ceiling, underlayment plywood, and numerous personal property items resulted in suit by the Hsu’s acting in pro per.
Facts
Lee Lifeng Hsu and Jane Yuchen Hsu (“Plaintiffs”) purchased a homeowners’ insurance policy from State Farm Fire...
Insurance Condition Requires Following the Intent of the Parties
Post number 5307
Principles of Contract Interpretation Compels Reading Contract as Written
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/portable-storage-containers-buildings-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-fkg1c and at https://zalma.com/blog.
In Eastside Floor Supplies, Ltd. v. SCS Agency, Inc., Hanover Insurance Company, et al., No. 2024-01501, Index No. 609883/19, 2026 NY Slip Op 01488, Supreme Court of New York, Second Department (March 18, 2026)
In May 2019, a fire damaged business personal property belonging to the plaintiffs, which was stored in portable storage containers at their Manhattan premises. At the time of the fire, the plaintiffs were insured under a businessowners insurance policy (BOP) issued by the defendant Hanover Insurance Company which provided general coverage for business personal property, and which included a specific extension for “Business Personal Property Temporarily in Portable Storage Units” (the portable storage ...
ERISA Saves Fraudulent Claims Suit
Post number 5306
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/failure-provide-well-pled-facts-defeats-most-action-zalma-esq-cfe-b4zuc and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Allegations of Fraudulent Insurance Billing Must be Pleaded with Specificity
In Genesis Laboratory Management LLC v. United Healthcare Services, Inc. and Oxford Health Plans, Inc., No. 21cv12057 (EP) (JSA), United States District Court, D. New Jersey (March 13, 2026) Genesis Laboratory Management LLC (“Genesis”), a New Jersey-based molecular diagnostic and anatomic pathology laboratory, provided COVID-19 related testing services and submitted claims for reimbursement as an out-of-network provider to United Healthcare Services, Inc. (“United”) and Oxford Health Insurance, Inc. (“Oxford”). Metropolitan Healthcare Billing, LLC (“Metropolitan”), owned by the same individual as Genesis, handled the billing for Genesis.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
United and Oxford, who administer both ERISA and ...
ERISA Saves Fraudulent Claims Suit
Post number 5306
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/failure-provide-well-pled-facts-defeats-most-action-zalma-esq-cfe-b4zuc and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Allegations of Fraudulent Insurance Billing Must be Pleaded with Specificity
In Genesis Laboratory Management LLC v. United Healthcare Services, Inc. and Oxford Health Plans, Inc., No. 21cv12057 (EP) (JSA), United States District Court, D. New Jersey (March 13, 2026) Genesis Laboratory Management LLC (“Genesis”), a New Jersey-based molecular diagnostic and anatomic pathology laboratory, provided COVID-19 related testing services and submitted claims for reimbursement as an out-of-network provider to United Healthcare Services, Inc. (“United”) and Oxford Health Insurance, Inc. (“Oxford”). Metropolitan Healthcare Billing, LLC (“Metropolitan”), owned by the same individual as Genesis, handled the billing for Genesis.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
United and Oxford, who administer both ERISA and ...
