Criminal acts of federal health care, securities and bank mortgage fraud cases for lawyers and lawyers

Healthcare fraud, bank / mortgage fraud, securities fraud, 18 USC § 1345, the federal government is charged with federal health offenses, bank mortgage crimes, securities crimes, and other criminal fees based on Chapter 18, Chapter 63 or imminent Act which allows civil lawsuits to be executed that enforce fees. Allow the court to freeze assets of individuals or organizations that are federal fraud laws and have acquired property as a result of past or present federal banking violations, medical breaches, security violations or other federal crimes. This legal authority to detain such acts and freeze defendant's assets is a powerful tool of federal weapons to fight fraud. Article 1345 is not widely used by the federal government in the past in connection with health and hospital care, bank mortgage and securities fraud, but when a lawsuit is brought by the government, the result of such case Regarding health care and hospital fraud lawyers, banks and mortgage lawyers, securities fraud law firm, the possibility that the defendant's ability to maintain defense may be fundamentally impaired if defendant's assets are frozen You have to understand. A white-collar criminal attorney, along with civil lawsuits, can be filed simultaneously with federal prosecutor with a criminal prosecution involving one of the suspected litigation, his health care and hospital care, bank loans,

Article 1345 permits the US Attorney General to initiate a civil lawsuit that forces persons from the following in a federal court.

• It violates or violates 18 U.S.C. §§ 287, 1001, 1341-1351, and 371 (including conspiracy to deceive the United States or its agents)

• Promise or promote a banking law violation

• Try to promise or promise federal medical crime.

Article 1345 acquires an injunction (without bond) or restraining order prohibiting the transfer, withdrawal, transfer, deletion, abandonment or disposal of real estate acquired as a result of the Banking Law violation and securities law violation by the US Attorney General It further stipulates that it can be a federal medical crime or property that can be traced to such a violation. The court must immediately proceed with hearings and decisions on such measures, as is guaranteed to prevent continuous and serious injuries to the United States or other persons, such a binding order or Type the prohibition or the class of the person who caused the action. In general, the procedure under Article 1345 shall apply to federal rules of civil lawsuits and to the Federal Criminal Procedure Rules, unless the indictment is returned to the accused.

The Government shall notify Article 1345 of the federal medical fraud case United States v. Bisig, et al., Civil Procedure 1: 00 - cv - 335 - JDT - WTL (SDIn.) This incident was a FDSI Relator, a private company engaged in the detection and prosecution of false inappropriate billing practices including Medicaid It was started rapidly. FDSI was hired by Indiana State and was able to access Indiana's Medicaid claims database. After investigating the co-defendant's home farm, FDSI filed an emergency case lawsuit in February 2000 pursuant to the civil false claims law of 31 states in the United States. §§ 3729, et seq. The government soon joined FDSI's home farm and Bisig's investigation and in January 2001 the United States banned 18 U.S.C. criminal fraud in progress and froze home farm and peggy and Philippe Bisig assets § 1345. In 2002, it was charged with Bisig and Home Pharm. In March 2003, against Bisig and / or Home Pharm, filed four cases of prosecution in violation of 18 U.S.C. One case of illegal payment of kickback that violated § 1347, 42 U.S.C. § 1320 a - 7 b (b) (2) (A), 18 USC Number of mail frauds Also asserted that a property of Bisig and Home Pharm is charged with criminal charges confiscated in the United States in accordance with 18 USC did. § 982 (a) (7). Under her conviction consent, Mr. Bisig agreed to lose the various parts of genuine personal property personally acquired during his scheme, and the assets of Home Pharm. The US took approximately $ 265,000 in an injunction lawsuit and collected approximately $ 916,000 in property forfeited in a criminal action. The court insisted that stakeholders could participate in the revenue of the recovered asset, as the rights of stakeholders in the forfeiture procedure were governed by 31 U.S.C. § 3730 (c) (5). This stipulates that the "arbitrators" will be maintained in the alternative proceedings that the arbitrator would have done in court proceedings.

An important issue when section 1345 is invoked is the range of assets that may be frozen. Under § 1345 (a) (2), fraudulent federal medical offenses, bank crime or securities crime property or revenue must be "traceable to such violation" in order to freeze. USA v. DBB, Inc., 180 F. 3 d 1277, 1280 - 1281 (November 1999); United States v. Brown, 988 F.2 d 658, 664 (6 th, 1993). United States v. Fang, 937 F. Supp. 1186, 1194 (D. Md.1 1996) (Assets frozen should be deemed illegal in some way. USA v. Quadro Corp., 916 F. Supp. 613, 619 (E.D. Tex 1996) (The court can freeze assets found to be relevant to the system). Even if the government is likely to seek damages against the defendant pursuant to the civil false claims law, the amount of high damages and the amount of civil penalty will determine the amount of assets that may be frozen There is none. Again, there is the possibility that only traceable income from criminal offenses may be frozen under laws and regulations. United States v. A slam, 147 F. Supp. 2 d 914 (N. D. Il. 2001).

The vast majority of courts found that relief under the injunction based on law does not require the courts to conduct traditional equilibrium analysis under Federal Civil Procedure Rule 65 Rule. Id. The mere fact that the law was passed implies that violating acts inevitably harm the public and should be detained if necessary, so it is impossible to recover unrecoverable harm and relief , Id. The government need only prove that a crime has occurred due to the superiority of the evidence standards. Id. However, other courts have balanced relief measures under traditional injunction when they face a lawsuit under section 1345. United States v. Hoffman, 560 F. Supp. 2 d 772 (D. Minn. 2008). These factors are (1) the threat of irreversible threats to employees in the absence of relief, (2) the balance between harm and harm caused by relief to other litigants, (3) the ultimate Possibility (4) It is related to the public interest, and borrowers arear the burden of evidence on each factor. Id.; United States v. Williams, 476 (F. The single factor is not definitive, the main problem is that the balance of the stock is to ask the court to hold the court until the court has determined the merit for the status quo. In contrast to cases where there is a possibility of injury to others, if the threat of unrecoverable harm to immigrants is minor, migrants should pay a particularly heavy burden to show the possibility of their merits being successful Bear it. Id.

In Hoffman The government presented evidence of the following facts to the court.

• Since June 2006, Hoffman purchased an apartment, switched to a condominium, sold individual apartments and gained considerable profits.

• In order to raise funds for venture companies, Hoffmann fraudulently obtains mortgage loans from financial institutions and mortgage lenders under the name of a third party and Hoffmanns will apply for mortgage to third party buyers I instructed a cooperating mortgage broker.

• Subject loan applications include inflation of buyer's income and bank account balance, failure to list the current asset point or other assets purchased at the time of the current mistake, failure to disclose other mortgages or obligations, Characterization The prepayment principal provided at the end.

• Hoffmann used this method from January to August 2007 to purchase more than 50 real estate.

• In general, Hoffman inherits or rents the lessor to the condominium department, after receiving the rental fee, pays a rent to a third party purchaser and applies it as a mortgage payment. Hoffmann and others usually transfer a portion of such rents and often caused third-party buyers to bear payment of mortgage payments.

• The US believes that the defendant's fraudulent activity is traceable to approximately $ 5.5 million.

The court found that the appointment of the recipient was a special remedy, but at that time the court judged it to be appropriate. The Hoffman The court stated that there is a legitimate financial structure that could coexist with straw buyers and fraudulent schemes and that neutral parties need to manage their property due to the possibility of leasing landscape and foreclosure .

Like other injunctions, defendants subject to an injunction under section 1345 are subject to contempt litigation if they violate such injunctive order. United States v. Smith, 502 F.Supp. 2 d 852 (D. Minn. 2007) (Defendant was frozen under 18 USC § 1345 and found guilty of criminal contempt for withdrawing money from the bank account under control did).

If the defendant prevails the lawsuit filed by the government under Article 1345, the defendant may receive attorney fees and expenses under the Equal Law Access Act (EAJA). United States v. Cacho-Bonilla, 206 F. Supp. 2 204 (D.P.R. 2002). EAJA agrees that the court will adjudicate expenses, fees and other expenses to private parties that are suing against the United States, unless the court finds that the position of the government is "virtually legitimate" I admit it. 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d) (1) (A). In order for the defendant to qualify for EAJA-based fee awards, (1) it is a prevailing party, (2) the government's position is not substantially justified. (3) There will be no ruling unless there are special circumstances. The application fee shall be submitted to the court listed on the statement within 30 days from the final judgment. Cacho-Bonilla, Above.

Healthcare fraud lawyers, bank and mortgage fraud law firms, securities fraud lawyers should be aware of the authority of the government under the Fraud Prohibition Act. Pursuant to federal federal law 18th chapter 63, filed a civil action to enforce federal medical fraud crime, bank fraud crime, securities fraud crime, other crime commissions or imminent duties, The asset may change the course of the case dramatically. Although Article 1345 was not frequently used by the federal government in the past, the federal prosecutor's office has found that prosecution, including medical care, bank mortgage and securities crime, is not possible if an incidental action under Article 1345 is filed Government will be more effective. Healthcare and hospital lawyers, banks and mortgage lawyers, securities law firms must understand that if defendant's assets are frozen, the defendant's ability to maintain defense may be severely compromised not.

Related Photos