OAG Opposes Disqualifying Late Relators in Xerox/Conduent Case

money bills

The story of Texas vs. Xerox/Conduent appears to be never-ending.

Relators to get money?

There is still the issue of qui tam relators and whether or not they are going to get a cut of the Xerox/Conduent settlement. We thought that the OAG (Office of the Attorney General) had already answered no.

But, wait for it, that now may not be the case.

Attempt to disqualify latecomers

In the latest episode of this tale, a motion was recently filed on behalf of Linda Reed, the apparent first whistleblower of Xerox’s alleged misdeeds regarding Medicaid orthodontic prior authorizations. The motion asked the court to disqualify the latecomer relators, um, because they were late. These include Dr. Christine Ellis and others, represented by lawyers James Moriarty, Waters & Kraus et al. These are seeking 20% of the state’s settlement with Xerox/Conduent or some $47 million more of taxpayer dollars.

Yet, Reed reached out to state officials about Xerox/Conduent’s apparently negligent prior authorization reviews in 2008. The others claim they did so in 2012, well after the situation was already publicly known via Byron Harris and WFAA.

Latecomers do not qualify per FCA, TMFPA

It should be pretty open and shut. According to our understanding, under the FCA (False Claims Act) and the TMFPA (Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act), no one can claim to be a relator if the deeds complained about were publicly disclosed. Case closed.

OAG opposes motion to disqualify

Ah, but the OAG, rather than joining with Reed in disqualifying the claims of the latecomers, is opposing the motion on the basis that Reed does not have standing to do so but, more importantly, that if the motion is granted it “would unfairly prejudice the State.” Huh?

Why? Would blow state’s pretense it didn’t know

It would seem to us that the OAG is really opposing Reed’s plea because it does not want a court ruling that disqualifies these late relators. This is for several reasons.

One, the OAG would look incredibly stupid after such a ruling to then go and settle with these people for some millions of taxpayer dollars. After all, the OAG provided Dr. Ellis et al letters that they were indeed relators in the case and was initially only disputing paying them a $47 million award.

Secondly and more importantly, if these relators are disqualified, it proves that the Texas government knew well before 2012 that Xerox/Conduent had a deficient orthodontic prior authorization process and the state just never did anything about it.

This then throws into question the basis for the state and OAG’s lawsuit against Xerox/Conduent and the suit it continues to pursue against a few dentists still today.

Political coverup to save face

We already know the unvarnished truth. The state knew all about it a long time ago and it has been a political coverup from day one to silence the truth.

OAG response

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *