Money Mismanagement at UKHC/KMSF

7/8/2018

"Once again, for those new to this blog site, at present there are 53 posts on the blog and each has its own set of comments. To read the comments you have to hit the word "Comments" at the beginning or end of the post. Somewhat confusing is that when you bring up the comments for a specific post it eliminates the other posts from the screen. To bring the other posts back up simply go back to the top of the page and click on Blog. Feel free to comment should you wish. No email address is required to make a comment so anonymity is strong. Due to some previous abuse of this right to anonymously comment, I have had to include an approval option, but I try to approve constructive comments within 24 hours. One last point of note, to read the earliest posts you have to click on the word "<<Previous" at the very bottom of the posts available. Finally, for those just looking for a good summary of the Dr. Kearney case, simply scroll down to the previous 12/10/2016 post. For social media developments on the Dr. Kearney situation I would encourage you to visit the excellent "Save Dr. Kearney Facebook Page":
https://www.facebook.com/Save-Dr-Kearney-1039697039481791/

Central to Dr. Kearney’s Whistleblower lawsuit is the claim that the extreme punitive measures taken by the University administration and its legal department to force him out of the University are a consequence of his questioning of the money management practices of UK Healthcare/KMSF. This included the public suggestion of an audit of KMSF at a special College of Medicine Faculty Council meeting (called to discuss this “legal matter”) that resulted in what several have interpreted as a threat by the Executive Vice President for Health Affairs, Dr. Karpf. Since this episode the University, using both University and outside lawyers, have gone to great expense (including multiple lawsuits) to prevent this audit by claiming this billing and money management arm of UKHC, KMSF, is not a component of the University. This in spite of the fact that it was founded by UKHC and uses almost exclusively UKHC personnel to run and manage its operation.

UK’s primary arguments in their multiple attempts to get Dr. Kearney’s lawsuit dismissed are that they were totally justified in the extreme actions they took to destroy his career and that there is no substance in his claims of money mismanagement by KMSF/UKHC. We have already noted multiple times on the blog the weakness in their argument for justification of the extreme measures they all of a sudden decided to impose on probably their best trauma surgeon, citing a history of a behavior that they had endorsed for 25 years with outstanding performance evaluations, promotion to full professor with tenure and many teaching awards.

Now their argument for no substance in Dr. Kearney’s claim of KMSF money mismanagement also appears to be faltering badly. It was the initial observation that a committee of individuals putatively involved in KMSF money management decisions (Practice Plan Committee) having never met for 4 years might suggest money mismanagement problems at KMSF. Of course the early claim (at the Faculty Council meeting) was that this was not a problem, or as General Counsel Thro put it to the Faculty Council, ‘this is none of the Faculty Council's business’. Since this, things have become a little dicier with regards to possible money mismanagement at KMSF. We have had exposure of the use of this KMSF managed revenue for private jets, parties at the Iroquois Hunt Club, Keeneland box seat season tickets, 5 million dollar payout to cover Hazard money mismanagement and now we have this $48,000,000 Class Action Lawsuit against the University of Kentucky/UK Healthcare for illegally using the state’s Department of Revenue as a collection agency (see here).

This document describes the case for 5 individuals that are deemed part of a much larger group that UKHC/KMSF has sent past due billing to the Kentucky Department of Revenue for collection of their debt. The Department of Revenue then garnishes the wages, bank accounts and tax refunds to pay off this debt, as well as the 25% commission they tack on to the debt. There are multiple claims in this lawsuit including the claim that the Department of Revenue can only do this type of collection work for “agencies” of the state. The lawsuit then makes the argument (citing KRS laws: an agency is: “an organizational unit or administrative body in the executive branch of state government”) that neither the University of Kentucky, nor its billing arm KMSF, fit into the category of “agencies” of the state. This must especially hold true if KMSF wishes to assert its claim as independent from the University. There are a bunch of other claims in this document along with KRS laws to support them, making it an interesting read. It really does read like UKHC, through this collaboration with the Department of Revenue, is simply handing anchors to many who are dogpaddling in deep water.

The bottom line being that these documented cases of KMSF money mismanagement along with the departure of key individuals involved in the Dr. Kearney vendetta as well as the rumored shake-up of KMSF management, all support the contention that the disciplinary actions taken against Dr. Kearney were retaliatory for his probes into KMSF money mismanagement and not for some unsupported contention that he used improper language in a trauma ward.

51 Comments

The man with no name

7/9/2018 08:25:27 am

Seems to me that only "The University" is named in this suit, not KMSF or UK Healthcare, and (aside from some waffling about possible tardy/incomplete/deceptive billing) the only reason "The University" is involved is because they have the $48 million that the suit seeks to recover. The real culpability here is the State/Department of Revenue. Are there other state or quasi state entities that they also collect for? Do they not make sure that what they are doing is lawful before they do it?

The more interesting sidebar is the concept that "The University" was motivated to get medicaid reimbursements- this is almost certainly true and consistent with the fact that UKHC/KMSF/the University has been making out like a bandit from the ending ACA reimbursements which, given the politics of the state, possibly sets a new standard for irony. UK Hospital revenues are already tanking...can't wait to see what happens when this really kicks in.

Dan Noonan

7/9/2018 11:28:50 am

Thank you for the comment The Man. KMSF is named in items 61 and 62 on pages 14 and 15 of the lawsuit (see below), but not being a legal beagle I would not even want to guess what their liability might be. I suspect it is almost standard procedure in these class action lawsuits to cast your net as wide as possible in hopes of snagging as many fish as you can. If KMSF in any capacity serves as the billing arm for UKHC and does any of the referring of past due accounts, then I would think they might be one of those fish. But whatever, it just adds another layer of questionable financial practices that KMSF may have participated in over the past decade, or to put it another way, just one more reason a detailed public audit of KMSF financial practices over the past 10 years might be warranted.

61. Some of the accounts of the Plaintiffs and class members that were referred by the University to the Department were bills generated by physicians and medical providers at the University. These providers, by contract, assigned their receivables to Kentucky Medical Services Foundation ("KMSF"), which is affiliated with and controlled by employees or agents of the University. KMSF referred these provider accounts for collection to Central Kentucky Management Services, Inc. ("CKMS''), a corporation affiliated with the University that acts as a collection agency for the accounts of the University and of physicians/providers via KMSF. These KMSF accounts (generated by physician/providers) were also referred to the Department of Revenue as "agency" debts.

62. Neither KMSF nor CKMS is an "agency" as defined at KRS 45.237(1)(a) or KRS 45.241(1)(c), or elsewhere, nor are they in or part of the executive branch of state government.

7/9/2018 04:40:28 pm

With respect to UK Healthcare and this lawsuit, this July 9 Herald Leader article entitled: "UK HealthCare patients seek class-action status for lawsuit alleging illegal billing" seems to directly implicate UKHC as a target of the lawsuit.

https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article214550790.html

The man with no brain

7/10/2018 06:24:36 am

This is another result of the poorly defined relationship between UK/UKHC/KMSF and the state which continues to result in these "cake and eat it" scenarios where "the university" can chose to claim its not an agency of the state when it suits it (e.g open records) but can decide it is an agency of the state in other cases (e.g using the state to collect debts).. Most other states with state universities that operate academic medical centers have settled this a long time ago but as usual Kentucky is behind the times. If anything good comes out of this lawsuit I think it will be a change in state law that better defines these relationships- probably by providing "The University" with some sort of qualified autonomy in some areas of operation which would likely include Healthcare.

7/10/2018 06:26:53 am

Also having read the lawsuit it only names "the University" as a defendant but then goes onto claim that UKHealthcare and KMSF are "trade names" that the university uses to operate its healthcare business. I am sure this will come up in the inevitable motion to dismiss that UK will eventually file in this case.

7/10/2018 09:04:03 am

Thanks again for your comments and contributions The Man. I agree, it will be interesting to see how all of this pans out, and if the courts should happen to decide in favor of the plaintiff it will be interesting to see how much it will cost the University of Kentucky and Susan Krauss in her official capacity as Treasurer of UK.

D. Frump

7/10/2018 02:40:44 pm

You know what, even if it does not make it to trial I have to believe the university won’t call on that incompetent Thro to litigate for them. Meaning, raise the tuition because we have to once again hire some outside lawyers to litigate another stupid decision implemented by the administrative body of this university. Perhaps a better question is: should public university hospitals be allowed to use the mafia to extract unpaid bills from the poor and destitute? Let’s ask Brett Kavanaugh!

7/10/2018 02:55:29 pm

Thanks for the comment D. Fromp. What can I say. I suspect if this legal decision did not make the wealthy wealthier, I doubt that Judge Kavanaugh would be voting for it. One thing I can say, "thank you UK for once again keeping the blog going."

Gideon

7/11/2018 05:14:41 am

We always have Jay Blanton to save the day for the UK administration: "it always is our goal and our mission to provide the greatest access to patient care for all Kentuckians regardless of their ability to pay."

Well we are calling B.S. on that one Jay. The true heartless character of the UK administration is borne out in the simple observation that the University administration is and has been fully aware of this policy of using the Department of Revenue to garnish wages from the poor and struggling while at the same time tacking on a 25% collection fee, and has “chosen” to continue it.

Mike Howard

7/11/2018 06:40:22 am

KMSF and CKMS were both notified of this egregious behavior at least 8 years ago as I was in the room with a representative of each entity, several attorneys and a person who had documented evidence that not only were they "not a state agency" (notes from Board of Trustees mtg and Attn Gen report) but also that the amount they were trying to withhold was in error and in fact the healthcare enterprise OWED the person a refund for over payment. Luckily the process stopped but only because this person knew what they were doing and had the resources to battle UK.

Sam C

2/5/2019 10:51:26 pm

As of today 02/04/2019 UK hospital is still referring hospital bills to the Commonwealth of Ky Revenue Dept for collections. I would have thought UK would have suspended the practice of referring while appealing the judges decision., but they havent.

The Man with No Brain

7/11/2018 06:18:53 am

If poor people in Kentucky are concerned about access to affordable healthcare they might want to consider voting for representation that supports it instead of trying not to pay their bills and then suing when held accountable for their healthcare debts. Not being chronically unhealthy might also be worth considering.

2/5/2019 10:56:08 pm

From what I've read patients are not trying to avoid paying their bills. Most say that UK had insurance on file but failed to bill it.

7/11/2018 09:00:51 am

Thanks for the comments Gideon, Mike Howard and The Man. I think I have to side with Gideon and Mr. Howard on this one The Man. I get where you are coming from with the “vote” suggestion (and actually agree), but I can’t see where that in any way makes acceptable, moral, or even legal, the activities being endorsed here by the University and UKHC administration. Some might interpret these activities as a form of big dog bullying, simply because we can. Furthermore, to generically group all of these individuals (especially in the state of Kentucky) into this category of “trying not to pay bills” is a bit unfair. Mr. Howard’s example proves that to be wrong. There are many reasons why people may be late (or interpreted as late) in paying (or have not paid) their hospital bill. Most of these have nothing to do with “trying not to pay bills”. As noted in the Herald Leader article, our other state university seeing these patients has identified a mechanism for dealing with this problem without tapping into the Department of Revenue and its 25% collector’s fee.

Barf Bag

7/12/2018 10:10:43 am

Good afternoon, College of Medicine,

After 11 years as chair of surgery, Dr. Jay Zwischenberger has announced his plans to step down on July 1, 2019. The College of Medicine and UK HealthCare are grateful for his innumerable contributions. Under his leadership, our department of surgery has experienced unprecedented success and growth, much to the benefit of the college, University, and the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

As an alumnus of the University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Dr. Zwischenberger returned to the college in 2007 as an internationally renowned surgeon with an extensive list of publications, now exceeding 350, in leading peer-reviewed journals. His research interests in respiratory failure, cardiopulmonary support, and lung cancer have been continuously funded. This work has led to five patents involving medical devices and the development of ambulatory ECMO, changing the landscape of health care worldwide.

During his time here, he was named UK HealthCare’s first surgeon-in-chief and was presented the first Kentucky Lung Health Champion Award by the American Lung Association. As an educator, he was responsible for the development of the “Zwisch model” of graduated responsibility for surgical residents, which has had a major national impact on the training of future surgeons.

His contributions extend beyond clinical care, research, mentorship, and education. Dr. Zwischenberger demonstrated his philanthropic commitment to UK with the recently established Zwischenberger Rounsavall Fund to encourage young trainees and faculty members to explore innovations to advance surgery. He is also an integral member of the College of Medicine campaign committee and will be vital to the college’s success in the future.

Dr. Zwischenberger will continue as chair through June of 2019 and will play an active role in the search, recruitment, and interview process for a replacement. His opinion will be highly valued during this process and we are all incredibly grateful for his support.

Join us in thanking Dr. Zwischenberger for his years of commitment to the College of Medicine and to UK HealthCare. To say he has made great contributions is an understatement and we are eternally indebted for his work in the department, college, and for the entire enterprise.

Sincerely,

Robert S. DiPaola, MD
VP and Dean of the College of Medicine

Good Riddance

7/12/2018 12:17:01 pm

Whoohoo, this is both good and bad news. Obviously good news because the department Zwish has Chaired for the past 11 years has had the ignominious reputation of scoring near or at the very bottom of the annual Press-Gainey physician satisfaction survey in past 3 years. Obviously Bad news because those of us still working in the department are stuck with him for another year. I'm guessing he needs this extra time to search for that illusive 2 inch Kearney file that he seems to have misplaced.

7/13/2018 01:56:15 am

Thanks for the information and comments Barf and Good. This was predictable and I believe predicted earlier on the blog. Dr. Zwischenberger's second 6 year term as Chair ends at the end of June, and, as noted by Good, with the poor Press-Gainey performances coupled with this Dr. Kearney litigation, it is hard to fathom any excuse they could come up with for renewing his position as Chair. It will be interesting to see whether they recruit from within or look outside for a replacement.

Concerned surgeon

7/15/2018 06:32:15 am

Why is there no discussion of the joe ionoco situation here?

7/15/2018 11:44:46 am

Good question Concerned. I do not know anything about Dr. Ionoco's departure. Hopefully someone else might be willing and able to update us.

Rob, Ben, Kell @ SDK page link

7/25/2018 10:14:48 am

Because Dr Iocono resigned on his own. For another reason.
There is no connection to KMSF controversy or Dr Kearney.

Surgeons knot

7/15/2018 02:25:55 pm

He did something bad, zwish tried to hide it but he did it again. And now its mutually convenient for him to leave. I am sure some sort of payoff/confidentiality agreement is involved. Hopefully the newspapers will get on the case and expose this. Bad timimg with the new sexual harassment policies...

7/15/2018 04:11:32 pm

Thanks Surgeon for this update on the Dr. Iocono departure. I suspected as much, and as I mentioned before, if his departure was involuntary I suspect it included one of those nondisclosure agreements that Mr. Thro likes to use to avoid publicity and allows him to relocate embarrassing problems to other unsuspecting work places. At least from my perspective it is a cowardly approach to handling these matters. Unfortunately this university administration lives by the motto that, “if nobody knows it happened it really did not happen”. It is a sad statement that image rather than truth is the driving force of the administration of an institution of higher learning. But come to think of it, that seems to be the motto of our current US President.

Felix Leiter

7/16/2018 04:23:38 pm

I just hope UK holds administrators accountable just like they hold physicians. For years surgeons who have power have been allowed to do anything at UK and everywhere else.

It's a good thing that people like Kearney and Iocono are gone/leaving. I know Dan likes to think Kearney is a victim, but that's just laughable. He got what he deserved. He ruined his own career through his own actions.

7/17/2018 01:52:57 am

Thanks for your comment Felix Leiter. I know nothing about Dr. Iocono’s situation, but I must say that your statement with reference to Dr. Kearney that: “He got what he deserved”, sounds more like a personal prejudice as opposed to an objective opinion. About the only way you could rationalize this would be if you are simply an “end justifies the means” type of person, and that in and of itself places you into this prejudicial category. As we have noted many times on the blog:

a) Dr. Kearney was tried in his absence and without any representation, and was convicted of a crime by a jury of individuals that had potential conflicts of interest.

b) The primary vindication of the verdict was predicated upon an alleged behavior that the University and College administration had signed off on for 25 years with outstanding performance evaluations, promotions, tenure and awards.

c) There appears to be evidence that some of the documentation used to arrive at the verdict had either been falsified or solicited.

d) The trial closely followed upon a threat by the EVPHA and was initiated based upon an infraction in the trauma ward that could not be confirmed by those present.

e) Neither the Board of Licensure nor the state court systems agreed with this KMSF/EVPHA/Dean deBeer/Bill Thro/Dr. Boulanger/Dr. Zwischenberger verdict and punishment.

I’m not trying to justify anything that Dr. Kearney has or has not done in his lifetime. What I am stating here is that the actions taken by the administration and their lawyers were both unconstitutional and a crime in and of themselves. There is a right way of doing things and a wrong way. The approach used here with Dr. Kearney is clearly the wrong way and because of that I truly hope (especially for the rights of the rest of the faculty at this University) that he wins his lawsuit. These people think because they are administrators and lawyers for the all powerful UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY that they can do anything they want and in any way they want to do it, or as the commenter above put it, this sounds more like a gulag than a university.

Finally, I think it important to point out that your sentiment with respect to this Dr. Kearney situation is clearly in the vast minority. This is evident with his recent election by University faculty to the University Senate, his recent election by College of Medicine faculty to their Faculty Council, recent honors bestowed upon him by the Residents and Fellows, the hundreds of letters Dr. Capilouto has received on his behalf and the thousands that have noted their support for him on the Facebook page.

concerned surgeon

7/17/2018 06:45:52 am

The only similarity between the Kearney and Iocono cases is that the sanctions are basically the same. The actual behaviors involved are not comparable.

The best lesson for all of us is to behave in a collegial and considerate manner. Any physician who doesn't do this is putting his or herself at risk of losing their clinical privileges. And even in cases where the sanctions may be pretextual (which I agree may be the case with Paul Kearney) the courts don't have jurisdiction over the medical staff credentialing process.

So lets behave and keep things civil.

7/17/2018 07:43:14 pm

Yes, we must all be civil to each other. If Dr Kearney had followed that advice, he would likely be employed by UK today.

There is much to be concerned about regarding UK’s attitude towards physicians. I have had many issues with the administration here and how they seem to belittle physicians and act like they are why the hospital is successful. There is much to be concerned about with regards to the treatment of Dr Kearney.

However, Kearney is no victim. As I stated above, he got what he deserved. It has been well known since I have been at UK for the past 15 years, that he quite simply is a jackass. No, not all physicians and surgeons are like that. In fact, it is well known that he is worse than most. I seriously doubt all the documentation UK has provided has been fabricated. To believe it has been would simply be whimsical thinking. Please check this out:

https://www.uky.edu/legal/kearney-administrative-proceedings
Pay particular attention to the Investigative Appendix.

Yes, it’s likely that UK turned a blind eye for years while Kearney acted the way he did, but that doesn’t excuse his actions. It is a positive step that surgeons can no longer act like the tyrants they have been for the past decades. Kearney overplayed his hand. Quite simply, there are plenty of other trauma surgeons who can do the job that he does. And they can do it while treating people with respect. The days of Kearneys and Ioconos are coming to an end. Good.

7/18/2018 10:27:48 am

Thanks again for the blog comment Felix Leiter. I feel it important to reiterate, this is what “you” think Dr. Kearney deserves, not what the majority voicing opinions on this matter think he deserves. Furthermore, your response here suggests your manners in the workplace might also be interpreted as needing some adjustment. That is unless you were referring to a male donkey, and if that is the case, I have known several very gentle, friendly, intelligent and kind animals of that ilk.

But back to what is more germane to my real concern with respect to this Dr. Kearney situation. We have previously provided blog readers with access to this documentation you cite in your comment. The thing one needs to keep in mind is that this is once again the “University’s” or “University’s lawyer’s” prejudicial interpretation and documentation of what happened. I notice that some potential documentation appears to be missing from this list. For example, where’s the documentation showing the results of the University lawyer’s attempt at getting Dr. Kearney’s medical license revoked. Unfortunately for the UK lawyers, these Board of Medical Licensure people used a neutral outside investigator to assemble all of the relevant facts submitted by both the University lawyers as well as Dr. Kearney. The Board of Medical Licensure committee upon reading the report and weighing the evidence concluded: “there is insufficient evidence of a violation to warrant a Complaint”. Similarly, also not included in this documentation is the result of the lawsuit filed by the patient claiming Dr. Kearney used inappropriate language while he resisted treatment to save his life (remember, the premise for initiating this whole MSEC trial thingy). The last sentence in this lawsuit document reads: “IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is DISMISSED with prejudice.” I can only guess that these documents were left off of this page because they didn’t fit well with the picture the University Lawyers and administration are trying to paint here.

So let me put it another way. What would you say if, rather than having a group of Dr. Kearney haters like Dr. Boulanger, Dr. deBeer, Dr. Karpf and Dr. Zwischenberger managing this trial, we go back and reinvestigate these complaints by assembling a judge, jury and investigative committee composed of former trauma patients whose lives were saved by Dr. Kearney? We then hold a closed hearing without any representatives for KMSF…. ahhh I mean UKHC, we bring in witnesses that respect and enjoy working with Dr. Kearney, we solicit affidavits from others who have benefited from Dr. Kearney’s medical expertise and we don’t record the proceedings, or we simply tell the person who is in charge of this function not to record the proceedings but rather provide a superficial summary that we can edit as we may wish to. I think everyone gets the picture.

Innocent or guilty, the prejudicial nature of the inquiry into Dr. Kearney’s history, as well as the people assigned to both litigate and determine guilt or innocence, totally negates the trustworthiness or even acceptability of any finding these folks came up with. The interesting thing to me is that the University lawyers not only sanctioned this but also participated in it. It is difficult to envision how a highly educated lawyer might interpret these as fair and just proceedings. So let’s see now, oh yeh, there is that little issue of KMSF/UKHC money mismanagement and Dr. Kearney’s Whistleblower lawsuit that has to be factored into this equation. As we have seen and are seeing, these same lawyers are willing to spend millions of dollars to keep this lawsuit from going to court. I feel certain that Mr. Leiter envisions no connection between this attempt to get rid of Dr. Kearney and this court case, but then again he also believes Dr. Kearney deserved what he got.

Finally, if this was a just and fair approach to handling this Dr. Kearney matter I have to believe Dr. Boulanger, Dr. deBeer, Dr. Karpf and Dr. Zwischenberger would not have chosen to abruptly leave or be asked to leave their positions at UK. Along these lines, although you may envision Dr. Kearney as gone from UK, he is still listed as one of your representatives on the University Senate and the College of Medicine Faculty Council.

Somebody is upset.

7/26/2018 06:11:41 pm

Your character shines through in your angry responses. There is no doubt that you are no saint...who is?

You speak of Kearney as some terrible person. He is as genuine as they come. A little rough around the edges, but he didn't hurt anybody. In fact, quite the opposite, he saved countless lives.

Only an idiot would say "there are plenty of other trauma surgeons who can do the job the he does." You must be a hospital administrator to voice something like that. If I ever need the services of trauma surgeon I could give a rat's ass about how much respect they show me, so long as they save my life.

You are a moron, Sir. Hope that's respectful enough for you. Sounds like you are going to be on the receiving end of Kearney's lawsuit. Enjoy.

Sybil Martin

8/8/2018 04:12:27 pm

Please remember that the Dr. Kearney and Dr. Iocono situation are entirely separate. Don’t consider them as one.

Fleet Elixier

7/18/2018 02:23:44 pm

You have to understand that this blog isn't really about Paul Kearney- its about fighting back against the tyranny of the Karpf administration and their destruction of the culture of not doing much that the proprietor and his friends used to enjoy about working (or rather not working while getting paid) at UK. I bet that the Judge doesn't let all of Kearney's claims go to trial and I am personally looking forward to the new levels of angst and outrage that will follow. Thats what keeps me coming back here!

7/18/2018 03:43:27 pm

Thanks for your comment Fleet Elixier and thanks for keeping up with the blog. If you begin to feel some angst, 88% of US trauma surgeons are in agreement that the best solution to this problem is a nice big shot of Makers Mark. Pour me one too while you are at it.

7/20/2018 02:13:55 am

A blog reader emailed me this excerpt from a recent New York Times article entitled: "Ann Hopkins Who Struck an Early Blow to the Glass Ceiling, Dies at 74", and asked if I would post it to the blog. With respect to our conversations, I think it is self explanatory. Thanks blog reader.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/17/obituaries/ann-hopkins-winner-of-a-workplace-bias-fight-dies-at-74.html?action=click&module=MoreInSection&pgtype=Article®ion=Footer&contentCollection=Obituaries

By her own admission, Ann Hopkins could be abrasive, vulgar, relentless and impatient in the office.

She was also one of the best young consultants that Price Waterhouse had in 1982 in its Washington branch, according to managers who put her up for a partnership that year. She had billed more hours than any of her counterparts — all of whom were men — and had helped secure a government contract that was then one of the largest deals in the accounting firm’s history.

Her partnership was denied.

Leaders at Price Waterhouse criticized her as “macho,” “difficult” and “aggressive,” according to a book she would later write. One male supervisor told Ms. Hopkins that, to have any chance of becoming a partner, she needed to “walk more femininely, talk more femininely, dress more femininely, wear makeup, have her hair styled and wear jewelry.”

She found vindication in the courts, waging a seven-year battle against Price Waterhouse that resulted in a 6-3 victory in the Supreme Court.

7/24/2018 09:44:42 pm

Another example of UK's selective enforcement policies? I've heard plenty about this surgeon's harassment of other individuals as well and nothing was done.

Piñata, slurs used to harass Mexican-born surgeon, and UK didn’t stop it, lawsuit says.
BY GREG KOCHER
gkocher1@herald-leader.com
LINKEDIN
GOOGLE+
PINTEREST
REDDIT
PRINT
ORDER REPRINT OF THIS STORY
July 24, 2018 03:38 PM
Updated 8 hours 45 minutes ago
Medical residents at the University of Kentucky were told to hit a piñata in the shape of a bull as part of the harassment directed toward a Mexican-born surgeon, according to a lawsuit filed in Fayette Circuit Court.

Dr. Alberto de Hoyos, a former professor of cardiothoracic surgery, alleged in a suit filed Monday that UK “did nothing to stop” the harassing conduct based on his national origin.

Dr. de Hoyos claimed in the suit that another physician, identified in the suit as Dr. Angela Mahan, allegedly referred to the piñata and to Dr. de Hoyos as “el toro” (the bull) and “el toro loco (the crazy bull).”

Read more here: https://www.kentucky.com/news/local/counties/fayette-county/article215416955.html#storylink=cpy
de Hoyos is suing UK but not Mahan, who is no longer at the university, according to the department. A suit gives only one side of a dispute.

UK spokesman Jay Blanton said Tuesday that the university has not received the complaint.

“The university will response to the lawsuit at the appropriate time and in an appropriate manner,” Blanton said in an email.

The suit said that immediately after de Hoyos began work at UK in 2016, Mahan began “a campaign of harassment based on his national origin.” (A release from the UK Department of Surgery said de Hoyos was “officially welcomed” to the faculty on Dec. 1, 2015.)

The harassment included calling de Hoyos pejorative names and advising cardiothoracic residents not to work with him, the complaint said. Mahan told others that de Hoyos “was an incompetent surgeon and advised other physicians to refrain from referring patients to him,” according to the lawsuit.

“Dr. Mahan made these comments, which employees throughout the cardiothoracic department heard on a near daily basis,” the suit says. “Although multiple people complained about the piñata, it remained in the cardiothoracic residents’ office for nine months.”

The complaint alleged that Dr. Sibu Saha, chief of cardiothoracic surgery, “did nothing to stop this harassment despite knowing about it. He even defended Dr. Mahan’s harassment.”

The suit said de Hoyos complained to others about the harassment, including Patty Bender, interim associate vice president of institutional equity; Dr. Joseph Zwischenberger, cardiothoracic department chair; Dr. Robert DiPaola, dean of the college of medicine; and Dr. Katherine McKinney, assistant dean of graduate medical education.

“Despite these complaints, nobody took any action to stop” Mahan’s conduct, the complaint said.

The “routine use of slurs” created an “intimidating, hostile and offensive workplace,” and de Hoyos resigned in September 2016. The suit said he “experienced substantial financial losses and emotional distress.” He also claimed the university violated the Kentucky Civil Rights Act.

Dr. de Hoyos now lives in Dallas. While at UK, de Hoyos was part of the thoracic oncology team at the Markey Cancer Center, according to a release from the College of Medicine. He treated lung and esophageal cancers and various tumors, with specialties in minimally invasive and robotic surgery.

The suit seeks damages and “equitable relief, including reinstatement.”

7/25/2018 01:41:30 am

Thanks again for the comment Felix Leiter. I am totally unfamiliar with both Dr. de Hoyos or Dr. Mahan and as I understand it from the article, neither is currently employed by the University. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court, because I know some people who would consider it a compliment to be called a bull. Furthermore, as noted in the article, it is important to remember that this is one side of the story. Especially considering it is being released by an attorney suing the University and not any individuals.

Thomas Becket

7/25/2018 06:30:22 am

Oh this is good. A couple of years ago someone in a management position here at the university called me a “damn yankee”. Morgan and Morgan, here I come!

7/25/2018 12:32:22 pm

Thanks for the comment Thomas Becket. Good luck with that lawsuit. Personally I can't see where being called a bull, crazy bull or even a damn yankee is much worse than being called a jackass. I hope you and Dr. de Hoyos have something more than this.

Leroy

7/27/2018 03:46:31 pm

This is just a false eeo suit from someone who lost their job or didn’t get their contract renewed for legitimate reasons but wants to pretend they were discriminated against. I am sure all of your blog readers are familiar with the concept.

Ozmataz Buckshank

7/30/2018 07:18:33 am

Any update on the Judge Scorsone deliberations about the UK motion to dismiss the Kearney complaint?

Hingle McCringleberry

7/30/2018 02:00:45 pm

I don't like the amount of time this is taking...

Jackmerius Thacktheritrix

7/31/2018 08:26:39 am

Yes, the longer this goes on the more likely it is that he is going to uphold some or all of the UK motion.

8/1/2018 01:51:03 am

Thanks Leroy, Ozmataz, Hingle and Jack for your comments. The only information I have received on the Dr. Kearney Case is that there is "still no decision from Judge Scorsone". Why that is, your guess is as good as anyones. Maybe he is being contemplative, or is waiting for Trump to shut down the government, or is on summer vacation, or is still reading the Blog?

Blog Voyeur

8/1/2018 08:51:41 am

I personally think it is because a judge who graduated from UK law school is having trouble presiding over a case that is essentially against UK law school. To me it's a no brainer. Essentially declare neutrality. Let it go to trial and relegate the decision on its outcome to a jury.

Grunky Peet

8/4/2018 05:04:48 am

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/whistleblower-cardiologist-exposes-unnecessary-heart-surgeries/

Now that some real whistleblowing- specific allegations with evidence.

Dan Smith

8/4/2018 09:24:20 am

Yeah. Why hasnt the kearney case got the feds interested in kmsf/ukhc. Kearneys whistleblowe case is so much stronger!

Montgomery flange

8/4/2018 01:54:32 pm

Yes!!!

8/4/2018 02:19:22 pm

Thanks for the comments Grunky and Dan. This really speaks to this issue of incentivizing physician income/salaries via patient numbers and the money they bring into a hospital.

Along these lines of patient care and this numbers game, as has been mentioned previously on the blog, a concern of this nature surfaced in UK CoM Faculty Council meetings with respect to the RVU system. Not necessarily the abuse of authority seen here but rather the potential impact this numbers game might have on quality of care. Of course this occurred during that era when Dr. Karpf was hell bent on getting the $500,000,000 he needed to complete his legacy the new hospital and brings us full circle into KMSF money management concerns, UKHC/KMSF resistance to any probe into their money management during these years and the Dr. Kearney whistleblower lawsuit.

Devoin shower-handel

8/4/2018 05:04:00 pm

We need healthcare reform- this isnt a uk or uk healthcare specific issue.

8/5/2018 03:02:11 pm

Thanks for the comment Devoin. I agree that we need healthcare reform and I hope that you are correct in your statement that this is not a UK or UKHC issue.

8/4/2018 06:28:40 pm

Yeah, the St Joe / KYOne scandal was horrendous and not surprising to anybody involved in cardiovascular medicine. It was the same at Kings Daughters (KDMC) in Ashland. Of course, somebody on this blog actually suggested that the trial of the KDMC folks was tainted because UK's own David Moliterno who acted as an expert witness in that trial would have acted unethically to try to gain a competitive advantage. That of course is ridiculous- KDMC's overuse of cardiac procedures is well known to everybody. But it goes the ludicrous lengths people on this blog will go to discredit anybody associated with UK administration.

Equally sad is the idea that the judge over the Kearney case is tainted because he is a UK grad. How is this different than the Trump and "fake news" crowd who cry and whine about bias every time something is said bad about them? Remember Trump tweeting about the "Mexican" (he was American of Hispanic heritage) judge who was overseeing his Trump University case? How is this any different?

It's more likely the judge will rule against Kearney because he doesn't have a case. I laugh every time I read about the "threat' against Kearney when he brought up KMSF finances. "If you don't like it here, you can leave" or something similar was the quote. Really? That's your threat? That's all you got?

Meanwhile UK responds with the volumes of material about Kearney's behavior which are well known throughout UK... But, hey, he's the victim, not the people he mistreated.

8/5/2018 03:21:37 pm

Thanks again for the blog comment Felix Leiter. Wow I can see we touched a nerve again. It is good to hear that you and Donald, the king of fake news, are on the same page. That explains a lot for me. As far as I know, Judge Scorsone has not ruled on this 3rd appeal of the University to get this case dismissed. As I commented above, this could be for any number of reasons. It is just as possible that Judge Scorsone has advised the UK hired lawyers that it would be in their best interest to settle this out of court and he is giving them time to do that. Furthermore, your trivializing the fact that Judge Scorsone is a UK Law School graduate seems a bit extreme to me. The previous judge excused himself from the case because his wife worked at UK. Not meaning that he would necessarily be biased in his decision making process but rather that it might be argued that he could be. I personally know some UK graduates who are diehard Wildcat fans and I know I would not want them involved in any decisions in which UK was part of the equation.

Well I guess if you wish to reiterate your hate for Dr. Kearney I feel it important to reiterate that this is what “you”, the “senior administration of UKHC/KMSF” (which could easily be one and the same) and the university “lawyers” for said administrators “wish” to believe. This appears “not” to be the case for the vast majority of UKHC physicians, the vast majority of UKHC Residents, the vast majority of UKHC Fellows, the vast majority of UKHC nurses, the vast majority of UKHC staff, the vast majority of CoM faculty, the vast majority of University faculty and the vast majority of general public.

All of this is in spite of this so-called “evidence” that you and the University lawyers would wish everyone to see and buy into. This includes unsigned documents, solicited documents, highly redacted documents, totally redacted documents and of course is missing anything that might contradict the picture (see suggestions above) that these lawyers, UKHC administration and you might wish to use to paint this negative picture of Dr. Kearney. We must also keep in mind that this evidence was posted by University lawyers who threatened Dr. Kearney with the infamous “take the deal or we will ruin your career”, University lawyers that are willing to spend millions of dollars to hide KMSF money management audits, University lawyers that are willing to spend millions of dollars to prevent Dr. Kearney’s Whistleblower’s lawsuit from going to trial and deposition evidence that caught some of these MSEC trial participants and Dr. Kearney haters basically lying under oath about this evidence (e.g. the missing or nonexistent 2-inch file) being used in their attempts to “ruin his career”. Marry this with the threat from Dr. Karpf and the accumulating evidence for KMSF money mismanagement, and your “that’s all you got” is really looking like a lot. I mean if it was such a weak Whistleblower case, why not simply take it to trial and be done with it? Why spend all of this money and anguish to prevent it from going to trial???

Last but not least, I, and most of the rest of the people monitoring this case (hopefully including Judge Scorsone), have to ask the same old question of why the University of Kentucky administration and its lawyers are sacrificing these millions of dollars of public revenue, this impact on hospital morale as well as retention and recruitment, simply to drive out a physician faculty member “for a behavior problem that they have signed off on and rewarded for 25 years”? The bottom line being, Dr. Kearney “is” the victim here. From our perspective it appears that your prejudice, or maybe involvement, prevents you from accepting the injustice of this trial in absentia, sentencing and punishment imposed on Dr. Kearney by the hospital and University administration and lawyers.

So once again I would like to thank you for your comment and providing us with the opportunity to hear the administration/UK lawyers perspective as well as the opportunity to respond to it. It keeps the fires burning.

Matthew Girard

12/17/2018 09:53:24 am

I would love to be a witness of the money mismanagement, and how heinous the UKY Hospital collection scheme is. I have horror stories, and assure you that without judgement or an option to dispute they can unilaterally take as much of your money and property as they want. My hospital bill became a $60,000 bill after interest and the addition of collection fees. When they take 3000 from your bank account they charge 600 for finding it. All for going to the hospital. They never told me I was eligible for healthcare assistance, and told me there was nothing I could do once they circumvented a judgement and dispute process. I now pay 600 a month with approximately 200$ going towards the original bill and 400$ going towards collector fee and accumulated interest.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Money Mismanagement at UKHC/KMSF

Leave a Reply.

UKy College of Medicine Discussions