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
- 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. - Plaintiff therefore seeks damages and declaratory relief against the Defendant.
DISCOVERY
- 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
- Plaintiff, DANIEL WALKER- RICE, is an individual, a resident of 2307
Stephens Grant Sugar Land, TX 77479-2244. - Defendant, UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC of address Universal
Corporate Center 367 South Gulph Road King Of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406.
2
JURISDICITON AND VENUE
- 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. - 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. - 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.
3
FACTS
- Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant, committed billing fraud in the following
way(s):
i. Between 9 th to 13 th 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;
ii. The Defendant lacked any justification to give Plaintiff two black box warning
drugs;
iii. 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.
iv. On or about September 9, 2019, the Defendant billed Plaintiff $350, which
Plaintiff yet no services were issued to Plaintiff on the said date.
v. 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.
4
vi. 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.
vii. 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.
viii. 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.
- 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. - 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.
5
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
COUNT 1
Healthcare Fraud
- Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all
the preceding paragraphs of this complaint as though fully stated herein. - Defendant knowingly made or caused to be made false statements or
misrepresentations of material facts on its billing records. These false statements include:
i. Between 9 th to 13 th 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;
ii. The Defendant lacked any justification to give Plaintiff two black box warning
drugs;
iii. 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.
iv. On or about September 9, 2019, the Defendant billed Plaintiff $350, which
Plaintiff yet no services were issued to Plaintiff on the said date. - 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
6
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.
- 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. - Plaintiff is therefore entitled to relief pursuant to Tex. Hum. Res. Code §.
36.110.
COUNT 2
Negligence
- Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all
the preceding paragraphs of this complaint as though fully stated herein. - Defendant owed a professional duty of care to its clients to ensure it provides
professional services to its clients. - 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:
i. Between 9 th to 13 th 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;
ii. The Defendant lacked any justification to give Plaintiff two black box warning
drugs;
7
iii. 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.
iv. On or about September 9, 2019, the Defendant billed Plaintiff $350, which
Plaintiff yet no services were issued to Plaintiff on the said date.
- 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. - 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. - 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.
8
COUNT 3
Intentional infliction of Emotional Distress
- Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all
the preceding paragraphs of this complaint as though fully stated herein. - The conduct of the Defendant as already alleged above is extreme and
outrageous conduct. - Defendant committed the said conduct intentionally, with full knowledge of
the impact of the said conduct on the Defendant. - Defendant has suffered emotional distress as a result of the Defendant’s
actions and/or inactions.
COUNT 4
Declaratory Relief
- Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all
the preceding paragraphs of this complaint as though fully stated herein. - 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. - 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:
9
i. Declaratory relief;
ii. Actual damages for the blameworthy conduct of the Defendant as alleged herein to
the maximum extent permitted under the law;
iii. Restitution of any amount of money paid by the
iv. Punitive damages;
v. Interest as provided by law;
vi. An award of fees and costs;
vii. Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully submitted:
Dated: __
DANIEL WALKER- RICE
.
Pro se
10
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.
NOTARY PUBLIC
DANIEL WALKER- RICE
.
Pro se
11
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]
DANIEL WALKER- RICE.
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, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )
