Q: True or false statement?

A: I can provide some general information, but for a definitive legal analysis, it's best to consult with a qualified California attorney. That said, here are a few thoughts:

1. Hospice fraud could potentially involve common law fraud and breach of fiduciary duty claims in some circumstances. Whether those specific claims apply would depend on the exact facts alleged and the nature of the relationships and representations made. Expert testimony may or may not be required depending on the complexity of the medical issues involved.

2. The fact that the plaintiff is alive 2.5 years after allegedly being diagnosed with a terminal disease could be relevant evidence that the diagnosis was incorrect. However, whether expert testimony would be required to prove the diagnosis was wrong would likely depend on the specific disease, the diagnostic methods used, and the complexity of the medical evidence.

In a case like this involving issues of medical diagnosis and hospice care, expert testimony may be helpful or even required to establish certain elements of the claims. But again, the necessity of expert testimony depends heavily on the particular facts and legal theories asserted. These types of cases often raise complex medical and legal questions.

I'd reiterate that for guidance on the merits of any potential legal claims and the evidence required, it's important to consult with an attorney who can assess the specific facts and provide advice based on the applicable law. Hospice fraud and medical malpractice cases tend to be quite fact-specific. An experienced attorney can provide much more definitive guidance tailored to the situation.