PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION

Case No. ______________

DANIEL WALKER- RICE,

                                  Plaintiff

    vs.  

UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC.,

                                Defendants

 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

GALVESTON COUNTY, TX

_________ JUDICIAL DISTRICT

 

PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION

  1. COMES NOW Plaintiff DANIEL WALKER- RICE, with this complaint against the Defendant UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC. Plaintiff action seeks to hold Defendant liable for healthcare fraud where the Defendant erroneously billed Plaintiff an forced him to take certain medication, which made Plaintiff develop Dyskinesia. Consequently, Plaintiff’s mother took him out of the Defendant’s facility, where Plaintiff had to undergo emergency medical attention. 
  2. Plaintiff therefore seeks damages and declaratory relief against the Defendant. 

DISCOVERY

  1. Plaintiff respectfully requests Discovery in this case be conducted under Level Three (3) pursuant to Rule 190.1 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

PARTIES

  1. Plaintiff, DANIEL WALKER- RICE, is an individual, a resident of 2307 Stephens Grant Sugar Land, TX 77479-2244.
  2. Defendant, UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC of address Universal Corporate Center 367 South Gulph Road King Of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406. 

 

JURISDICITON AND VENUE

  1. This Court has jurisdiction over the Defendant because Defendant has conducted business and/ or committed torts in a manner to establish contacts necessary for the imposition of the jurisdiction of this Court. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter because the damages are within the jurisdictional limits of this court. 
  2. LONG ARM JURISDICTION – The Texas Long-Arm Statute allows Texas courts to exercise jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant that “does business” in the state. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 17.042 (Vernon 2008). A nonresident defendant’s minimum contacts must derive from purposeful availment: a nonresident defendant must have “purposefully availed” itself of the privileges and benefits of conducting business in the foreign jurisdiction to establish sufficient contacts with the forum to confer personal jurisdiction. Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 474-76, 105 S. Ct. 2174, 2183-84 (1985)); Xenos Yuen v. Fisher, 227 S.W.3d 193, 200 (Tex. App.–Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, no pet.). An act or acts “by which the defendant purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities” in Texas and “thus invok[es] the benefits and protections” of Texas law, constitutes sufficient contact with Texas to confer personal jurisdiction. Michiana Easy Livin’ Country, Inc. v. Holten, 168 S.W.3d 777, 784 (Tex. 2005) (quoting Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 253, 78 S. Ct. 1228, 1240 (1958)). In the instant action, the Defendant’s principal office is at Universal Corporate Center 367 South Gulph Road King Of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406. However, Defendant operates and does business in the State of Texas. 
  3. Venue is proper in this Galveston County pursuant to Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code § 15.002(a)(1) because the facts constituting the causes of action herein occurred in whole or in part in Galveston County, Texas. 

 

FACTS

  1. Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant, committed billing fraud in the following way(s):
  1. Between 9th to 13th September 2019, the Defendant billed Plaintiff for medical visits even though Plaintiff had hardly spent a minute long in the Defendant’s facility, for each day billed;
  2. The Defendant lacked any justification to give Plaintiff two black box warning drugs;
  3. On or about September 8, 2019, the Defendant billed the Plaintiff $100 for an alleged medical visit. Plaintiff avers that the said billing was erroneous and/or fraudulent because Plaintiff was never given a proper medical screening examination and the on-call “doctor” was not on site as required by hospital code. This was in violation of the requirements of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requirements (EMTALA), which requires hospitals to adopt policies that are compliant with EMTALA. 
  4. On or about September 9, 2019, the Defendant billed Plaintiff $350, which Plaintiff yet no services were issued to Plaintiff on the said date. 
  5. On or about September 22, 2019, Plaintiff became so ill that he needed emergency medical attention. Plaintiff’s mother therefore sought emergency medical appointment for Plaintiff with Dr. Torres, after the Defendant failed to treat Plaintiff’s deteriorating health. Plaintiff therefore did not appear in any way at the Defendant’s facility again. However, on or about September 23, 2019, Defendant billed Plaintiff $200 for an alleged medical visit.   
  6. The Defendant documented Plaintiff that he had a history of drug abuse yet Plaintiff has neither drinks nor uses any drugs. Notably, the Defendant neither performed a drug test nor did toxicology report. 
  7. The Defendant also documented that Plaintiff had destroyed company property, so that they could keep Plaintiff. The allegations were untrue. Plaintiff had just put posters up around the family business office where he is employed at, in order to protest “issues” that needed to be addressed. 
  8. Plaintiff also asserts that the Defendant lied in its documentation that Plaintiff was “detained” at the family business office by the police officer who came to the site when he was instead detained by a “peace officer” hours later at his house. If the Defendant had correctly reported that a police officer on the site of the incident had deemed the Plaintiff stable enough to safely drive a vehicle home then Defendant would not have held Plaintiff against his will. It follows; the Defendant did not report true facts and Plaintiff was held against his will even though none of the criteria for involuntary Commitment under the U.S. Constitution were met. Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407, 409-10, 122 S. Ct. 867.
  1. On or about September 22, 2019, Plaintiff became so ill that he needed emergency medical attention. Plaintiff’s mother therefore sought emergency medical appointment for Plaintiff with Dr. Torres, after the Defendant failed to treat Plaintiff’s deteriorating health.    
  2. As a result of the Defendant’s malpractice in forcing medication on Plaintiff, Plaintiff developed Dyskinesia. Plaintiff therefore had to spend $20,000 in an attempt to cure the illness. 

 

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

COUNT 1

Healthcare Fraud

  1. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the preceding paragraphs of this complaint as though fully stated herein.
  2. Defendant knowingly made or caused to be made false statements or misrepresentations of material facts on its billing records. These false statements include:
  1. Between 9th to 13th September 2019, the Defendant billed Plaintiff for medical visits even though Plaintiff had hardly spent a minute long in the Defendant’s facility, for each day billed;
  2. The Defendant lacked any justification to give Plaintiff two black box warning drugs;
  3. On or about September 8, 2019, the Defendant billed the Plaintiff $100 for an alleged medical visit. Plaintiff avers that the said billing was erroneous and/or fraudulent because Plaintiff was never given a proper medical screening examination and the on-call “doctor” was not on site as required by hospital code. This was in violation of the requirements of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requirements (EMTALA), which requires hospitals to adopt policies that are compliant with EMTALA. 
  4. On or about September 9, 2019, the Defendant billed Plaintiff $350, which Plaintiff yet no services were issued to Plaintiff on the said date. 
  1. Defendant knowingly or intentionally made, or caused to be made, induced, or sought to induce the making of false statements or misrepresentations of material facts concerning information required to be provided by a federal or state law, rule, regulation or provider agreement pertaining to the Medicaid Program in violation of Section 36.002( 4) of the TMFPA. The false statements include a documentation that the Plaintiff had a history of drug abuse yet Plaintiff never drinks and never uses any drugs. Notably, the Defendant neither performed a drug test nor did toxicology report. Defendant also made false billing entries as alleged above. 
  2. As a result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff, and hundreds of other patients and/or clients were either misdiagnosed or were billed for services not performed. Further, as a result of the Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff developed Dyskinesia and had to spend $20,000 in an attempt to cure the illness. 
  3. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to relief pursuant to Tex. Hum. Res. Code §. 36.110.

COUNT 2

Negligence

  1. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the preceding paragraphs of this complaint as though fully stated herein.
  2. Defendant owed a professional duty of care to its clients to ensure it provides professional services to its clients. 
  3. Defendant breached the said duty by erroneously billing the Plaintiff and falsifying records. As alleged above, Defendant knowingly made or caused to be made false statements or misrepresentations of material facts on its billing records. These false statements include:
  1. Between 9th to 13th September 2019, the Defendant billed Plaintiff for medical visits even though Plaintiff had hardly spent a minute long in the Defendant’s facility, for each day billed;
  2. The Defendant lacked any justification to give Plaintiff two black box warning drugs;
  3. On or about September 8, 2019, the Defendant billed the Plaintiff $100 for an alleged medical visit. Plaintiff avers that the said billing was erroneous and/or fraudulent because Plaintiff was never given a proper medical screening examination and the on-call “doctor” was not on site as required by hospital code. This was in violation of the requirements of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requirements (EMTALA), which requires hospitals to adopt policies that are compliant with EMTALA. 
  4. On or about September 9, 2019, the Defendant billed Plaintiff $350, which Plaintiff yet no services were issued to Plaintiff on the said date. 
  1. Defendant also knowingly or intentionally made, or caused to be made, induced, or sought to induce the making of false statements or misrepresentations of material facts concerning information required to be provided by a federal or state law, rule, regulation or provider agreement pertaining to the Medicaid Program in violation of Section 36.002( 4) of the TMFPA. The false statements include a documentation that the Plaintiff had a history of drug abuse yet Plaintiff never drinks and never uses any drugs. Notably, the Defendant neither performed a drug test nor did toxicology report. Defendant also made false billing entries as alleged above. 
  2. As a result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff, and hundreds of other patients and/or clients were either misdiagnosed or were billed for services not performed. Further, as a result of the Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff developed Dyskinesia and had to spend $20,000 in an attempt to cure the illness. 
  3. The actions of the Defendant are the closest cause of the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff. Had the Defendant not forced medication on Plaintiff, Plaintiff would not have developed Dyskinesia and would not have had to spend $20,000 in an attempt to cure the illness. 

COUNT 3

Intentional infliction of Emotional Distress

  1. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the preceding paragraphs of this complaint as though fully stated herein.
  2. The conduct of the Defendant as already alleged above is extreme and outrageous conduct. 
  3. Defendant committed the said conduct intentionally, with full knowledge of the impact of the said conduct on the Defendant. 
  4. Defendant has suffered emotional distress as a result of the Defendant’s actions and/or inactions. 

COUNT 4

Declaratory Relief

  1. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the preceding paragraphs of this complaint as though fully stated herein.
  2. There now exists, between the parties hereto, a dispute and controversy to which the Plaintiff and the Defendant are entitled to have a declaration of their rights and further relief relating to the facts and circumstances as set forth in this action.
  3. Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court issue a declaratory judgment declaring that the actions and/or inactions of the Defendant violates the rights of Plaintiff, and issue appropriate remedies thereof. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff is entitled to damages from the Defendant, and he hereby prays that judgment be entered in his favor and against the Defendant and the following relief be issued:

  1. Declaratory relief;
  2. Actual damages for the blameworthy conduct of the Defendant as alleged herein to the maximum extent permitted under the law;
  3. Restitution of any amount of money paid by the 
  4. Punitive damages;
  5. Interest as provided by law;
  6. An award of fees and costs;
  7. Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. 

 

Respectfully submitted:

 

Dated: __________

 

Case No. ______________

DANIEL WALKER- RICE,

                                  Plaintiff

    vs.  

UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC.,

                                Defendants

 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

GALVESTON COUNTY, TX

_________ JUDICIAL DISTRICT

 

DECLARATION OF PLAINTIFF

My name is DANIEL WALKER- RICE. I am over eighteen years of age and of sound mind. I am therefore capable of making this declaration. 

I am the Plaintiff in this case. I have read the above Original Petition. I verify that the facts stated herein are within my personal knowledge and are true and correct. 

 

SWORN TO BEFORE ME and subscribed in my presence this _________ day of ________ 2022.

                     

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify on the ____________day of _______________, 2022, that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Complaint were served by placing a copy in the United States Postal Service, with postage prepaid, addressed upon the following:

 

SERVICE ON:

Defendant:

[ENTER ADDRESS]

Attorney General

Pursuant to Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 36.102(a)

[ENTER ADDRESS]

 

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, we will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible.