Legal Opinion

United States v. Mitrione

District Court, C.D. Illinois

Decided July 6, 2001No. 00-30021PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

SCOTT, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on Defendants Mitrione and Devores’ Motion for Partial Dismissal of the Indictment, Motion to Strike and Motion in Limine. For the reasons set out below, Mitrione and Devores’ Motion for Partial Dismissal of the Indictment is DENIED, Motion to Strike is DENIED, and Motion in Limine is DENIED.

Defendants argue that all references to substitute billing (i.e., submitting claims under Mitrione’s provider number for services performed by others) as a fraudulent billing scheme should be dismissed or struck from the indictment as well as…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hernon v. E.W. Corrigan Construction Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Hernon v. EW Corrigan Const. Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1992
  3. First Bank of Oak Park v. Avenue Bank and Trust Company of Oak Park and Federal Deposit Insurance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1979
  4. Indiana ex rel. Indiana Department of Public Welfare v. SullivanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1991

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States v. Robert T. Mitrione and Marla A. DevoreCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004
  2. United States v. Devore, Marla A.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API