COURT of CLAIMS of THE

REPORTS OF Cases Argued and Determined IN THE COURT of CLAIMS OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS VOLUME 48 Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion for: Fiscal Year 1996—July 1, 1995-June 30, 1996 SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 1997 (Printed by authority of the State of Illinois) (X704516—300—7/97) PREFACE The opinions of the Court of Claims reported herein are pub- lished by authority of the provisions of Section 18 of the Court of Claims Act, 705 ILCS 505/1 et seq., formerly Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 37, par. 439.1 et seq. The Court of Claims has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine the following matters: (a) all claims against the State of Illinois founded upon any law of the State, or upon any regulation thereunder by an executive or administrative officer or agency, other than claims arising under the Workers’ Compensation Act or the Workers’ Occupational Diseases Act, or claims for certain expenses in civil litigation, (b) all claims against the State founded upon any contract entered into with the State, (c) all claims against the State for time unjustly served in prisons of this State where the persons imprisoned shall receive a pardon from the Governor stating that such pardon is issued on the grounds of innocence of the crime for which they were imprisoned, (d) all claims against the State in cases sounding in tort, (e) all claims for recoupment made by the State against any Claimant, (f) certain claims to compel replacement of a lost or destroyed State warrant, (g) certain claims based on torts by escaped inmates of State institutions, (h) certain representation and indemnification cases, (i) all claims pursuant to the Law Enforce- ment Officers, Civil Defense Workers, Civil Air Patrol Members, Paramedics, Firemen & State Employees Compensation Act, (j) all claims pursuant to the Illinois National Guardsman’s Compensation Act, and (k) all claims pursuant to the Crime Victims Compensation Act. A large number of claims contained in this volume have not been reported in full due to quantity and general similarity of con- tent. These claims have been listed according to the type of claim or disposition. The categories they fall within include: claims in which orders of awards or orders of dismissal were entered without opinions, claims based on lapsed appropriations, certain State employees’ back salary claims, prisoners and inmates-missing property claims, claims in which orders and opinions of denial were entered without opinions, refund cases, medical vendor claims, Law Enforcement Officers, Civil Defense Workers, Civil Air Patrol Members, Para- medics, Firemen & State Employees Compensation Act claims and certain claims based on the Crime Victims Compensation Act. How- ever, any claim which is of the nature of any of the above categories, but which also may have value as precedent, has been reported in full. ii OFFICERS OF THE COURT JUDGES ROGER A. SOMMER, Chief Justice Morton, Illinois Chief Justice - January 15, 1993— Judge - February 26, 1987—January 15, 1993 RANDY PATCHETT, Judge NORMA F. JANN, Judge Marion, Illinois Chicago, Illinois March 26, 1985— May 1, 1991— RICHARD MITCHELL, Judge ROBERT FREDERICK, Judge Jacksonville, Illinois Urbana, Illinois February 24, 1993— June 1, 1992— ANDREW M. RAUCCI, Judge DAVID A. EPSTEIN, Judge Chicago, Illinois Chicago, Illinois November 9, 1994— June 20, 1994— February 28, 1984—June 1, 1992 To align rule MATTHEW J. FINNELL JOSEPH MICHAEL MATHIS, JR. Court Administrator Staff Counsel Springfield, Illinois Springfield, Illinois COMMISSIONERS JERRY DOUGLAS BLAKEMORE STEPHEN CLARK Chicago, Illinois Belleville, Illinois CAROL C. DILLARD MICHAEL FRYZEL Chicago, Illinois Chicago, Illinois JOSEPH P. GRIFFIN (Retired 12-30-95) J. PATRICK HANLEY Chicago, Illinois Chicago, Illinois WATTS C. JOHNSON (Retired 4-30-96) MICHAEL J. KANE Princeton, Illinois Chicago, Illinois EVERETT McLEARY NANCY OWEN Chicago, Illinois Mattoon, Illinois STEPHEN PACEY RICHARD H. PARSONS (Resigned 8-25-95) Paxton, Illinois Peoria, Illinois ROBERT RATH ELIZABETH M. ROCHFORD Harrisburg, Illinois Lincolnwood, Illinois JAMES E. SHADID THOMAS STERNIK Peoria, Illinois Chicago, Illinois THEODORE WEINBERG (Died 5-31-96) JEFFREY WHIPPLE Chicago, Illinois Lake Forest, Illinois GEORGE H. RYAN Secretary of State and Ex Officio Clerk of the Court January 14, 1991— KATHERINE A. PARKER Deputy Clerk and Director Springfield, Illinois March 1, 1995— iii CASES ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS REPORTED OPINIONS FISCAL YEAR 1996 (July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996) (No. 80-CC-0867—Claim denied.) MOHAWK MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Claimant, v. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent. Opinion filed September 20, 1995. SHELDON A. HARRIS, for Claimant. JIM RYAN, Attorney General (CARA LE FEVOUR SMITH, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent. STATUTES—Dangerous Drug Abuse Act—treatment of addicts—licens- ing requirements. Section 14 of the Dangerous Drug Abuse Act prohibits any person from maintaining a facility or providing services for the treatment of addicts and abusers of dangerous drugs without first obtaining a license from the Illinois Dangerous Drug Abuse Commission. PUBLIC AID CODE—violations of Federal or State law—termination of vendor participation in Medical Assistance Program. Pursuant to the Public Aid Code, a violation of Federal or State law by an owner or officer of a cor- porate vendor participating in the Medical Assistance Program is grounds for terminating the vendor’s participation in the program. 1 2 SAME—vendor’s refusal to provide information to Department of Public Aid—termination of MAP eligibility. The Public Aid Code provides that a medical vendor’s participation in the MAP program can be terminated if the vendor fails to furnish information requested by the Department of Public Aid regarding payments for providing goods or services, or fails to furnish all information required by the department in connection with the rendering of services or supplies to public aid recipients by the vendor, his agent, em- ployer or employee. EXHAUSTION OF REMEDIES—failure to exhaust administrative remedies rendered claim subject to dismissal. To prevail in the Court of Claims, a Claimant must exhaust all other remedies and sources of recovery, and the Claimant pharmacy’s failure to exhaust its remedies by appearing at an administrative hearing rendered its claim subject to dismissal. VENDOR PAYMENT CLAIMS—pharmacy’s refusal to submit to audit and obtain license under Dangerous Drug Abuse Act—claim denied. A claim by a pharmacy seeking payments for medical services rendered to Medical Assis- tance Program recipients was denied, since the Claimant’s participation in the program had been terminated because the Claimant was treating nar- cotic addicts without the Dangerous Drug Abuse Commission license required by State law, and it willfully concealed material facts by refusing to submit to an audit of the invoices for which it sought payment. OPINION FREDERICK,J. The Claimant, Mohawk Medical Center, Inc., filed its claim in the Court of Claims on December 6, 1979. The Claimant seeks One Hundred Three Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-Seven & 49/100 Dollars ($103,997.49) from the Illinois Department of Public Aid as a partici- pant in the State’s Medicaid program for claims that were disallowed by the department. This cause and the claim of Francisco Roque, M.D. (80-CC-0035) were consoli- dated for trial. On May 16, 1987, the Respondent filed a consoli- dated department report. A first amendment to the con- solidated department report was filed on May 30, 1990. Pursuant to section 790.140 of the Court of Claims Regu- lations (74 Ill. Adm. Code 790.140), the departmental report and amendment thereto are considered to be prima 3 facie evidence of the facts set forth therein. (Memorial Medical Center v. State (1988), 40 Ill. Ct. Cl. 73.) The record indicates copies of the original report and amendment were sent to Claimant’s counsel as required. Also, pursuant to our regulations as stated in Court of Claims Regulations (74 Ill. Adm. Code 790.20), it is our practice to follow the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure except as provided in our rules. This is an important distinction as it affects the weight we give to requests to admit and department reports. Our rule on the prima facie evidentiary value of department reports is a specific rule in this Court and as such supersedes the Illinois Code of Civil Proce- dure in regards to requests to admit where there are con- flicts. The prima facie facts established by the departmental report and the facts established by the testimony, exhibits and Requests to Admit are that Claimant, Mo- hawk Medical Center, Inc., seeks vendor payments total- ing $103,997.49 pursuant to section 11—13 of the Public Aid Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 23, par. 11—13, now 305 ILCS 5/11—13) for medical services which it alleges were invoiced to the Illinois Department of Public Aid (“IDPA”) during 1978. The identity of such medical services was not indicated in Claimant’s complaint. Subse- quently, in response to Respondent’s discovery requests, Claimant produced copies of IDPA-form drug invoices, representing total gross billings (before reduction to ID- PA’s maximum-payment ceilings for the drugs and other pharmacy items invoiced) of $101,376.54. Claimant des- ignated the services identified on these invoices as the in- tended subject of its claim in this proceeding. Claimant, Mohawk Medical Center, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “Mohawk”), is an Illinois corporation. Its sole shareholder and “administrator” is Alan Hartzman. Mohawk operated a facility at 832 West Madison Street in Chicago in 1977 and early 1978. The facility consisted 4 of a number of physicians’ offices and a pharmacy, lo- cated within a single building.

Load more