The issues in this case are whether Respondent committed the allegations contained in the Amended Administrative Complaint and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.Petitioner failed to demonstrate that Respondent's license was issued in error, nor did it prove that Respondent has not completed an approved course of study. Allegations of fraud personal to Respondent were abandoned.
Pursuant to section 409.913(15), (16), and (17), Florida Statutes; Florida Administrative Code rule 59G-9.070; and the Final Audit Report issued on November 17, 2015 (FAR), the issues are whether Petitioner overpaid Medicaid reimbursements to Respondent during the audit period of January 1, 2011, through February 28, 2014 (Audit Period), and, if so, the amount of the total overpayments; whether Petitioner may impose a fine against Respondent and, if so, the amount of the fine; and whether Petitioner may recover costs from Respondent and, if so, the amount of the costs.Pet. proved overpayments of Medicaid claims for 35 patients during audit period & may extend this total to all claims during audit period. Pet may impose fine of lesser of $100 per violation re 35 patients or 5% of extended overpayment.
The issues in this case are whether Respondent, a massage therapist, obtained a license: (a) by means of fraudulent misrepresentations; (b) which she knew had been issued in error; and/or (c) without having completed a course of study at an approved school, as Petitioner alleges. If so, it will be necessary to determine an appropriate penalty.Petitioner failed to prove that Respondent, using fraudulent misrepresentations, obtained a message therapy license due to an agency error, without having completed a course of study at an approved school.
Whether the Respondent committed the violations alleged in paragraphs 5 through 24 and 26 through 37 of the Corrected Second Amended Complaint, as modified, and, if so, the penalties that should be imposed.Respondent committed numerous violations of the Florida Drug and Cosmetic Act, including fraudulent authentication of drug pedigrees and purchase of adulterated drugs. Recommended a $185,000 fine and revocation of license as prescription drug wholesaler.
