Q: Including claim into legal case - federal court question.

A: In considering whether a CMIA (Confidentiality of Medical Information Act) violation claim can be included in a healthcare FCA (False Claims Act) case, especially after it was stricken from a prior EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) case, it's important to review the specific circumstances of your case. Federal courts often assess the relevance and legal sufficiency of claims in the context of the overarching legal action.

One key aspect to consider is whether the CMIA violation is factually and legally related to the FCA claims. The FCA focuses on fraud against government programs, while the CMIA deals with the confidentiality of medical information. If the CMIA violation claim has a direct impact on the FCA allegations, such as contributing to the fraudulent activity, it might be deemed relevant.

Additionally, the doctrine of res judicata or claim preclusion may come into play. This doctrine prevents a party from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in a prior action. However, if the CMIA claim was stricken for reasons unrelated to its merits, such as procedural issues, it may not be barred in the new context.

It would be prudent to consult the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and relevant case law to understand the specific rules and precedents that could affect your ability to include a CMIA claim in a healthcare FCA case. Each case is unique, and the court's decision can depend on how the facts and legal arguments are presented.

Remember, the successful inclusion of such a claim often hinges on demonstrating its relevance and materiality to the FCA allegations against the hospital and hospice. It's advisable to tailor your arguments to clearly establish this connection.