United States District Court For The District of Maryland

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
JANE DOE, ED.D.,
Washington, D.C. 20007
Plaintiff,
v.
THE JOHNS HOPKINS
HEALTH SYSTEM CORPORATION,
600 N. Wolfe Street
Baltimore, MD 21205,
Baltimore City
Serve: Joanne E. Pollak, Esq.
600 N. Wolfe Street
Administration 414
Baltimore, MD 21205
and
SUBURBAN HOSPITAL, INC.,
8600 Old Georgetown Road
Bethesda, MD 20007,
Montgomery County
Serve: Tresa Fitch
Bethesda, MD 20814
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Civil Action No.
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Plaintiff Jane Doe, Ed.D., through counsel, HANNON LAW GROUP, LLP, brings this action
against Defendants Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation (JHHS), and Suburban Hospital, Inc.
In support of her complaint, Dr. Doe alleges the following:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1.
This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 because it
involves a case or controversy arising under the laws of the United States, 31 U.S.C. 3729 et seq. This
Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs state law claims, which form part of the same case
or controversy under 28 U.S.C. 1367.
2.
The Court also has jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. 1332, because the
amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, and the parties are citizens of different States.
3.
Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391 because, inter alia, the acts
complained of occurred in this district.

PARTIES
4.
Defendant Suburban Hospital, Inc., is a Maryland corporation that owns and operates a
general acute care hospital located at 8600 Old Georgetown Road, in Bethesda, Maryland 20814.
5.
Defendant The Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation, is a Maryland non-stock
corporation with a principal place of business at 600 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205. JHHS is a
not-for-profit organization and the sole owner of Suburban Hospital.
6.
Plaintiff Jane Doe, Ed.D. is a licensed psychologist and a resident of the District of
Columbia. From November 2013 through August 2015, Dr. Doe was employed by JHHS and Suburban
as Director of Outpatient Mental Health at Suburban Hospital.
FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

7.
Prior to 2013, Dr. Doe owned a thriving solo psychology practice for over 25 years.
8.
In 2013, Suburban Hospitals accreditation for its Outpatient Mental Health Department
lapsed. The Department was in poor condition to be reaccredited due to ethics and compliance failures
of the Departments former Director. Among other things, Suburban Hospital had discovered that the
Director routinely completed patient notes before meeting with patients and allowed unlicensed
therapists to treat patients. Under the former Directors leadership, Suburban had also been running an
unlicensed Partial Hospitalization Program. Upon learning of these violations, rather than terminating
the former Director and referring him to the state licensure board for discipline, Suburban Hospital
allowed the Director to resign.
9.
In the summer of 2013, the Medical Director of Suburbans Behavioral Health
Department, and Suburbans Corporate Director, recruited Dr. Doe to serve as the new Director of
Suburbans Outpatient Mental Health Department.
10.
The Medical Director and Corporate Director told Dr. Doe they needed her help to rectify
the ethics and compliance failures within Suburbans Outpatient Mental Health Department.
11.
Relying on promises of support from the Medical Director and Corporate Director, in
November of 2013, Dr. Doe drastically reduced her private practice and began work at Suburban
Hospital as Director of Outpatient Mental Health.
Reporting of Ethics and Regulatory Compliance Failures
12.
Dr. Doe immediately identified significant ethical and regulatory issues, which, if not
rectified, would cause the hospital to lose its accreditation.
13.
As required by JHHS policy, Dr. Doe immediately reported each of these issues to her
supervisors and to JHHSs compliance department.

14.
Dr. Doe then set out to correct all of the issues. As a result of her efforts, in May 2014
Suburban Hospital passed a state regulatory audit and received a license for its Partial Hospitalization
Program.
15.
Dr. Does tireless efforts to bring the program into compliance also led to a certification
in May 2015 from the Joint Commission on Behavioral Health, an independent not-for-profit
organization that accredits and certifies more than 20,000 healthcare organizations nationwide. The
certification serves as a symbol of quality that reflects an organizations commitment to meeting
performance standards.
16.
Despite her success in correcting many of the ethics and compliance failures, Dr. Does
efforts to correct less visible program defects were met with resistance. Many of these problems
involved fraudulent billing practices of Axis Healthcare Group, a private psychiatry services company
controlled by Suburban Hospitals Medical Director that, among other things, contracts with Suburban
to provide psychiatric services. The problems Dr. Doe identified with respect to Axis include, but are
not limited to, the following:
a. Axis psychiatrists working at Suburban regularly removed patients from group therapy
sessions for which Suburban billed, and placed them in individual therapy sessions, for
which Axis billed, resulting in double-billing to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services (CMS), insurance companies, and patients.
b. Axis psychiatrists working at Suburban reported to Axis that sessions with patients lasted
two to three times longer than they actually did, resulting in artificially inflated bills to
CMS, insurance companies, and patients.
c. Axis psychiatrists working at Suburban violated CMS regulations by admitting patients
without preparing treatment plans, failing to reconcile medications, failing to meet
regularly with patients, and backdating treatment plans. By submitting bills for these
services to CMS, insurance companies, and patients, the psychiatrists falsely certified
their compliance with CMS regulations.
d. Suburbans Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP) required patients to visit an Axis
psychiatrist once per week, even if the patients had their own doctor. This was
inconsistent with the standard of care, and these unnecessary services were billed to
CMS, insurance companies, and patients.
17.
Dr. Doe reported all of these concerns to Suburbans management. She first reported
them to the Medical Director and the Corporate Director in July 2014, but they did nothing. Dr. Doe
then raised the issues to her supervisor, the Senior Vice President of Clinical Operations, who initially
encouraged her to investigate the matter. However, when Dr. Doe produced some of the falsified
records for review, the Senior Vice President warned Dr. Doe not to use the word fraud in her
presence, as doing so would require the Senior Vice President to report the matter. The Senior Vice
President did nothing to address the fraud.
18.
Dr. Doe repeatedly raised her concerns to a JHHS Compliance Officer located at JHHS
headquarters in Baltimore and also to a Compliance Officer located at Suburban Hospital. Although the
JHHS Compliance Officer was generally supportive, she claimed JHHS was unable to do anything about
5
the Axis contract physicians or their billing methods. The JHHS Compliance Officer arranged for Dr.
Doe to speak with the Vice President of Medical Affairs at Suburban Hospital, who initially expressed
concern, but ultimately did nothing to remedy the fraud.
19.
In addition to the fraudulent billing practices, Dr. Doe discovered that the Medical
Director and other Axis employees working at Suburban Hospital referred Suburban patients to private
practices within the Axis network for ongoing treatment. In other words, the Medical Director placed
his Axis employees at Suburban where they could prescribe ongoing treatments for patients and then
refer them to other Axis practices to receive that treatment, while appearing to work for Suburban. The
Medical Director, through Axis, received payment in four different ways: (1) Axis was paid a fee from
Suburban Hospital for providing psychiatrist services; (2) Axis billed patients, insurance companies, and
CMS for services provided by its psychiatrists at Suburban Hospital; (3) Axis was paid for the services
of the Medical Director, who was contracted through Axis; and (4) Axis billed patients, insurance
companies, and CMS for services provided to former Suburban patients at private Axis practices, who
were referred to those practices by Axis employees at Suburban Hospital. One Suburban employee told
Dr. Doe that the Medical Director had offered that employee a job at Axis on the condition that she
would also work part-time at Suburban and refer Suburban patients to Axis private practices for
ongoing treatment.
20.
Between December 2013 and April 2014, Dr. Doe reported to the Corporate Director, the
Head of Medical Affairs, the Senior Vice President of Clinical Operations, and other management
officials at JHHS and Suburban that these self-referrals were a conflict of interest, violated JHHS policy,
and violated federal and Maryland Stark Laws; however, the practices continued.
21.
Dr. Doe also discovered that an Art Therapist allowed an unlicensed student intern to run
Suburbans art therapy program without supervision, in violation of both hospital policy and Md. Code
Ann., Health Occ. 17-309. Compliance with state regulations pertaining to licensing and supervision
is also a precondition of payment from CMS for services provided to patients.
22.
In 2014, Dr. Doe reported the Art Therapists conduct to the Corporate Director and to
the acting head of Human Resources for Suburban, among others. Dr. Doe recommended termination of
the Art Therapist. Although they initially agreed, the Corporate Director and the Acting Human
Resources Director feared that the Art Therapist would retain an attorney and reveal that Suburban had
been providing unlicensed care for years. They said the issue should stay in house and commanded
Dr. Doe to issue a written warning instead of pursuing removal.
23.
In October 2014, Maryland law changed to require a license for operating any art therapy
program. The Art Therapist did not apply for her license in a timely manner; however, she continued to
operate the art therapy program without a license.
24.
In January 2015, Dr. Doe again reported the Art Therapist to the Corporate Director and
others. Although several senior hospital managers agreed that the Art Therapist should be terminated,
the Corporate Director issued yet another written warning, still fearful of what the Art Therapist might
reveal to regulators.
25.
Dr. Doe further witnessed the Corporate Director, who had no medical training,
recommend treatment for patients and make other medical decisions beyond his competence.
26.
Dr. Doe reported this to the Medical Director, the Chair of the Psychiatry Department,
the Vice President of Medical Affairs, the Senior Vice President, and the JHHS Compliance Office.
According to the Medical Director and the Psychiatry Department Chair, this practice had been going on
for years.
27.
The Corporate Director left Suburban in February 2015, without explanation. Some of
Dr. Does staff, and most of the inpatient unit employees, who were largely fond of the Corporate
Director, blamed Dr. Doe for causing his departure.
28.
In December of 2013, the Medical Director asked Dr. Doe to evaluate Suburbans Partial
Hospitalization Program (PHP) and to prepare a model program that could be used at a private
medical center. The Medical Director indicated that if Suburban did not renew the Axis contract, then
he would run the PHP under his own corporate umbrella. Dr. Doe immediately recognized that this
violated Suburbans conflict of interest policy, and told the Medical Director that she would not perform
the assignment.
29.
In July 2015, the Medical Director proposed that Suburban begin a relationship with
Mindoula, a company that provided individualized telephonic outpatient support for mental health
patients following their discharge from the hospital. This telephonic support did not meet the standard
of care for psychiatric services, but it was profitable for both Mindoula and Suburban. Hospitals are
fined if discharged patients return to the hospital for treatment within thirty days, and this limited
telephonic support was designed to delay or avoid readmission. Under the Medical Directors proposal,
Suburban would pay for the first 30 days of the service. The hospital benefitted by avoiding penalties
while Mindoula received a guaranteed stream of clients. Dr. Doe later learned that the Medical Director
had an undisclosed relationship with Mindoula.
30.
Dr. Doe informed Suburbans Management that Mindoulas telephonic outpatient support
did not meet the professional standards of psychiatric care, and that the Medical Directors undisclosed
8
relationship created yet another conflict of interest in violation of hospital policy. She urged Suburbans
management to investigate the matter.
Termination
31.
On August 17, 2015, Dr. Doe was summoned to the Senior Vice Presidents office by the
Senior Director of Human Resources, where the two were waiting. The HR Director informed Dr. Doe
that she was being terminated due to a reorganization of her department.
32.
Although JHHS policy requires that an employee affected by reorganization be
consulted and provided with six-weeks notice before the effective date of reduction, Dr. Doe was not
given any notice.
33.
During this meeting, the HR Director asked Dr. Doe to sign a severance agreement
releasing any claims of whistleblower retaliation and falsely acknowledging both that she was not aware
of any wrongdoing by Suburban or JHHS and that she had not brought any compliance matters to its
attention. The document appeared to have been printed in track changes mode, and these provisions
were underlined and marked in a manner that suggests they were added to a standard severance
agreement specifically for Dr. Doe.
34.
During this meeting, the HR Director recited a list of bizarre, offensive, embarrassing,
and false allegations regarding Dr. Doe. He said these allegations had nothing to do with the
termination, and that he just thought she should be aware of them. Dr. Doe understood this as a threat: if
she fought against the termination or blew the whistle on Defendants fraud, these false allegations
would be spread by Defendants. When the meeting concluded, the HR Director escorted Dr. Doe out of
the building in front of employees and patients.
35.
On August 19, 2015, Dr. Doe had a telephone conversation with the HR Director. He
reiterated that Dr. Does termination was due to reorganization within the Behavioral Health
Department. However, he also said her termination was partly based upon the allegations that he
previously said were unrelated. Dr. Doe asked whether he investigated any of the allegations, and the
HR Director admitted that he had not.
36.
On September 14, 2015, Dr. Doe notified JHHS that she had retained counsel in
connection with her termination. Shortly thereafter, the Washington Center for Psychoanalysis
(WCP), a professional organization in which Dr. Doe is a member, received a call from Suburban
Hospital that repeated many of the false, defamatory, and embarrassing statements noted by the HR
Director.
37.
Also in this time period, a Suburban employee told the Washington School of Psychiatry
(WSP)an unrelated organization where Dr. Doe held a teaching positionthat she would withdraw
from the program if Dr. Doe continued to teach the class. As a result, WSPs Steering Committee called
for an emergency meeting, and decided to terminate Dr. Does teaching position.
38.
Subsequent to her termination, Dr. Doe returned her focus to rebuilding her private
practice. Although WCP and WSP had previously served as Dr. Does primary sources of client
referrals, due to the false and embarrassing allegations spread by JHHS, Suburban, and their agents, she
has not received any referrals from the organizations and her business has suffered.
10
COUNT ONE FALSE CLAIMS RETALIATION (31 U.S.C. 3730(h))

39.
All of the preceding allegations are incorporated herein.
40.
Dr. Doe took actions to stop violations of the False Claims Act and in furtherance of a qui
tam action by investigating, questioning, and reporting the fraudulent billing practices, self-referrals, and
provision of services by unlicensed employees, as described above.
41.
Suburban, JHHS, and their agents knew that Dr. Doe had taken actions to stop violations
of the False Claims Act and in furtherance of a qui tam action.

42.
As a result of Dr. Does engagement in protected activity, JHHS and Suburban harassed,
threatened, and terminated Dr. Does employment as Director of Outpatient Mental Health at Suburban
Hospital, causing her to suffer damages in the form of lost wages, attorneys fees, and other special
damages.
COUNT TWO RETALIATION UNDER
THE MARYLAND HEALTH CARE WORKER
WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT (Md. Code. Ann., Health Occ. 1-502)
43.
44.
Dr. Doe had a reasonable, good faith belief that JHHS, Suburban, and their agents
violated Md. Code Ann., Health Occ. 17-309 by permitting unlicensed care providers to render
medical services to patients, which created a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety.
45.
Dr. Doe reported the unlawful activities to her supervisors, management, and compliance
officers at JHHS and Suburban, both orally and in writing, and afforded JHHS and Suburban a
reasonable opportunity to correct the activities.
46.
Dr. Doe objected to and refused to participate in the unlawful activities.
11
47.
As a result of Dr. Does disclosures and objections, JHHS and Suburban harassed,
threatened, and terminated Dr. Does employment as Director of Outpatient Mental Health at Suburban
Hospital, causing her to suffer damages in the form of lost wages, attorneys fees, and other special
damages.
COUNT THREE POST-TERMINATION
RETALIATION UNDER THE MARYLAND HEALTH CARE WORKER
WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT (Md. Code. Ann., Health Occ. 1-502)
48.
49.
As a result of Dr. Does disclosures and objections described in Count II and her
subsequent notification to JHHS and Suburban that she retained counsel to contest her unlawful
termination, JHHS, Suburban, and their agents, repeated the false and defamatory allegations, both to
others within JHHS and Suburban Hospital and to outside professional organizations, with full
knowledge of the falsity of the allegations, resulting in lost business opportunities and damage to Dr.
Does reputation.
COUNT FOUR DEFAMATION
50.
51.
JHHS, Suburban, and their agents, intentionally, knowingly, and/or recklessly published
and disseminated the false and defamatory statements about Dr. Doe identified above to third parties,
including representatives of the Washington School of Psychiatry Washington and representatives of the
Washington Center for Psychoanalysis.
52.
The statements exposed Dr. Doe to public scorn, hatred, contempt or ridicule, and
discouraged others in the community from having a good opinion of, or associating with, Dr. Doe.
12
53.
The statements are defamatory per se because they tend to injure Dr. Does trade,
profession, and community standing, and tend to make Dr. Doe appear odious, infamous, and ridiculous.
54.
The statements have caused and continue to cause substantial injury to Dr. Does
reputation, business, and personal well-being, and have caused and continue to cause her to suffer
embarrassment, humiliation, emotional distress, and other mental suffering.
COUNT FIVE -- INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH BUSINESS RELATIONS
55.
56.
JHHS, Suburban, and their agents, intentionally made false and defamatory statements
about Dr. Doe to third parties, including representatives of the WSP and WCP, in order to interfere and
cause damage to Dr. Doe in her lawful business as a psychologist.
57.
The defamatory statements adversely reflected Dr. Does fitness for employment and to
practice as a psychologist.
58.
The defamatory statements were made with malice and were calculated to interfere and
cause damage to Dr. Doe in her lawful business as a psychologist.

59.
As a result of Defendants conduct, Dr. Doe has suffered and continues to suffer
emotional injury, damage to her reputation, lost business, and damage to her future career as a
psychologist.
13
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe, Ed.D., requests the following relief:

a.
All relief necessary to make Plaintiff whole;
b.
An order providing for reinstatement with the same seniority status and full fringe
benefits that Dr. Doe would have received but for Defendants actions or, in the
alternative, front pay;
c.
Removal of any adverse personnel record entries based on or related to the
violation;
d.
Two times the amount of back pay and front pay, plus interest;
e.
Any other special damages as provided by applicable statute;
f.
Pre-judgment and post-judgment interests;
g.
Punitive damages;
h.
An order directing Defendants to pay reasonable attorneys fees and litigation
costs; and
i.
Such further relief as the Court deems just.
14
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff Jane Doe, Ed.D., hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues of fact and law
raised by the allegations in this Complaint.
Dated: May 25, 2016
Respectfully submitted,
HANNON LAW GROUP, LLP
J. Michael Hannon
Daniel S. Crowley
333 8th Street , N.E.
(202) 232-1907
(202) 232-3704, Facsimile
jhannon@hannonlawgroup.com
dcrowley@hannonlawgroup.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
15
CIVILDocument
COVER 1-1
SHEET
Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC
Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 1
JS 44 (Rev. 11/15)
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
DEFENDANTS
Jane Doe, Ed.D
The Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation and Suburban

Hospital, Inc.
Washington, DC
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff
County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

NOTE:
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)
J. Michael Hannon & Daniel S. Crowley

Hannon Law Group, LLP
333 8th Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002
Baltimore City
(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
Attorneys (If Known)
(202) 232-1907
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only)

u 1
U.S. Government
Plaintiff
u 3
Federal Question
(U.S. Government Not a Party)
u 2
U.S. Government
Defendant
u 4
Diversity
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff

(For Diversity Cases Only)
PTF
Citizen of This State
u 1
DEF
u 1
and One Box for Defendant)

PTF
DEF
Incorporated or Principal Place
u 4
u 4
of Business In This State
Citizen of Another State
u 2
Incorporated and Principal Place

of Business In Another State
u 5
u 5
Citizen or Subject of a
Foreign Country
u 3
Foreign Nation
u 6
u 6
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only)

CONTRACT
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
TORTS
110 Insurance
120 Marine
130 Miller Act
140 Negotiable Instrument
150 Recovery of Overpayment
& Enforcement of Judgment
151 Medicare Act
152 Recovery of Defaulted
Student Loans
(Excludes Veterans)
153 Recovery of Overpayment
of Veterans Benefits
160 Stockholders Suits
190 Other Contract
195 Contract Product Liability
196 Franchise
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
REAL PROPERTY
210 Land Condemnation
220 Foreclosure
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment
240 Torts to Land
245 Tort Product Liability
290 All Other Real Property
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
PERSONAL INJURY
310 Airplane
315 Airplane Product
Liability
320 Assault, Libel &
Slander
330 Federal Employers
Liability
340 Marine
345 Marine Product
Liability
350 Motor Vehicle
355 Motor Vehicle
Product Liability
360 Other Personal
Injury
362 Personal Injury Medical Malpractice
CIVIL RIGHTS
440 Other Civil Rights
441 Voting
442 Employment
443 Housing/
Accommodations
445 Amer. w/Disabilities Employment
446 Amer. w/Disabilities Other
448 Education
FORFEITURE/PENALTY
PERSONAL INJURY
u 365 Personal Injury Product Liability
u 367 Health Care/
Pharmaceutical
Personal Injury
Product Liability
u 368 Asbestos Personal
Injury Product
Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY
u 370 Other Fraud
u 371 Truth in Lending
u 380 Other Personal
Property Damage
u 385 Property Damage
Product Liability
PRISONER PETITIONS
Habeas Corpus:
u 463 Alien Detainee
u 510 Motions to Vacate
Sentence
u 530 General
u 535 Death Penalty
Other:
u 540 Mandamus & Other
u 550 Civil Rights
u 555 Prison Condition
u 560 Civil Detainee Conditions of
Confinement
u 625 Drug Related Seizure

of Property 21 USC 881
u 690 Other
BANKRUPTCY
u 422 Appeal 28 USC 158
u 423 Withdrawal
28 USC 157
PROPERTY RIGHTS
u 820 Copyrights
u 830 Patent
u 840 Trademark
LABOR
u 710 Fair Labor Standards
Act
u 720 Labor/Management
Relations
u 740 Railway Labor Act
u 751 Family and Medical
Leave Act
u 790 Other Labor Litigation
u 791 Employee Retirement
Income Security Act
u
u
u
u
u
SOCIAL SECURITY
861 HIA (1395ff)
862 Black Lung (923)
863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
864 SSID Title XVI
865 RSI (405(g))
FEDERAL TAX SUITS

u 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff
or Defendant)
u 871 IRSThird Party
26 USC 7609
IMMIGRATION
u 462 Naturalization Application
u 465 Other Immigration
Actions
OTHER STATUTES
u 375 False Claims Act
u 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
3729(a))
u 400 State Reapportionment
u 410 Antitrust
u 430 Banks and Banking
u 450 Commerce
u 460 Deportation
u 470 Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations
u 480 Consumer Credit
u 490 Cable/Sat TV
u 850 Securities/Commodities/
Exchange
u 890 Other Statutory Actions
u 891 Agricultural Acts
u 893 Environmental Matters
u 895 Freedom of Information
Act
u 896 Arbitration
u 899 Administrative Procedure
Act/Review or Appeal of
Agency Decision
u 950 Constitutionality of
State Statutes
V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only)

u 1 Original
Proceeding
u 2 Removed from
State Court
u 3
Remanded from
Appellate Court
u 4 Reinstated or
Reopened
u 5 Transferred from
Another District
(specify)
u 6 Multidistrict
Litigation
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
31 U.S.C. 3730(h)
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Anti-retaliation under the False Claims Act
u CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION

VII. REQUESTED IN
UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.
COMPLAINT:
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY
JUDGE
DATE
CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:

u Yes
u No
JURY DEMAND:
DEMAND $
DOCKET NUMBER
SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
05/25/2016
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT #
AMOUNT
APPLYING IFP
JUDGE
MAG. JUDGE
Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1-3 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 2

SOUTHERN DIVISION
JANE DOE, ED.D.,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE JOHNS HOPKINS
600 N. Wolfe Street
Baltimore City
600 N. Wolfe Street
Administration 414
Baltimore, MD 21205
and
Bethesda, MD 20007,
Montgomery County
Serve: Tresa Fitch
Bethesda, MD 20814
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Civil Action No.
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED UNDER PSUEDONYM

Plaintiff, through counsel HANNON LAW GROUP, LLP, respectfully moves this Court
for an Order waiving the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a) and L.R. 102(2)(a), and
permitting her to proceed under the pseudonym Dr. Jane Doe in all filings in this case. As
grounds therefore, Plaintiff refers the Court to accompanying Memorandum of Points and
Authorities.
Dated: May 24, 2016
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________________
J. Michael Hannon,
Daniel S. Crowley,
333 8th Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
(202) 232-1907
Fax: (202) 232-3704
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a copy of the forgoing was sent via First Class U.S. Mail and electronic
mail, on May 24, 2016, to:
Joanne E. Pollak, Esq.

General Counsel
Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation
600 N. Wolfe Street
Administration 414
Baltimore, MD 21205
Tresa Fitch
Suburban Hospital, Inc.
Bethesda, MD 20814
Daniel S. Crowley

SOUTHERN DIVISION
JANE DOE, ED.D.,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE JOHNS HOPKINS
600 N. Wolfe Street
Baltimore City
600 N. Wolfe Street
Administration 414
Baltimore, MD 21205
and
Bethesda, MD 20007,
Montgomery County
Serve: Tresa Fitch
Bethesda, MD 20814
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Civil Action No.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND

AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED UNDER PSUEDONYM
Plaintiff, through counsel HANNON LAW GROUP, LLP, respectfully submits this
Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of her Motion for Leave to Proceed under
Pseudonym.
Federal Rule 10(a) requires that the title of a complaint include the names of all parties,
Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a), and Local Rule 102(2)(a) requires that the original complaint contain the
names and addresses of all parties and the county of residence of any Maryland party. L. Civ.
R. 102(2)(a). Although the courts favor an open judicial process, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has recognized that certain cases allow for parties to proceed
anonymously, and that this determination is made by the trial court at its discretion. James v.
Jacobsen, 6 F.3d 233, 242 (4th Cir. 1993). In Jacobsen, the Court identified five non-exclusive
factors for trial courts to consider. Those factors are:
[1] Whether the justification asserted by the requesting party is merely to avoid
the annoyance and criticism that may attend any litigation or is to preserve
privacy in a matter of sensitive and highly personal nature;
[2] whether identification poses a risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm to
the requesting party or even more critically, to innocent nonparties;
[3] the ages of the persons whose privacy interests are sought to be protected;
[4] whether the actions is against a governmental or private party; and
[5] the risk of unfairness to the opposing party from allowing an action against it
to proceed anonymously.
Id. at 238-39 (citations omitted).
Most of the above factors weigh in favor of Plaintiff remaining anonymous in all court
filings in this case. First, Plaintiff seeks to preserve her privacy in a highly sensitive and
personal matter involving a list of bizarre, defamatory statements made against her and published
by Defendants. Plaintiff is a practicing psychologist and not only have these defamatory
statements caused emotional injury, lost business, and damage to her reputation, but they falsely
reflect upon Plaintiffs own mental health. Thus, these defamatory statements should not be used
in connection with her legal name in court documents, as they would only bring further
embarrassment and damage to her reputation.
Second, requiring Plaintiff to proceed under her legal name poses needless risk of mental
harm. Plaintiff is fearful that she may face further psychological and emotional harm from
having this highly sensitive experience made permanently available to anyone with access to the
Internet, as further disclosure of these defamatory statements made against her would cause
irreversible harm.
The fifth Jacobsen factor also weighs in favor of anonymity, as permitting Plaintiff to
proceed under a pseudonym in all court filings will not prejudice Defendants defense of this
case. Defendants know Plaintiffs identity as her counsel has had prior communications with
Defendants relating to her claims. Defendant would not be hindered from fully investigating and
responding to the allegations because most of the likely witnesses are Defendants own
employees and others who can be easily identified.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court receive the attached Complaint
and allow Plaintiff to proceed using pseudonym Dr. Jane Doe to protect her from further injury.
Dated: May 24, 2016
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________________
J. Michael Hannon,
Daniel S. Crowley,
333 8th Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
(202) 232-1907
Fax: (202) 232-3704
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
JANE DOE, ED.D.,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE JOHNS HOPKINS
and
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Civil Action No.
ORDER
In consideration of Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Proceed Under Pseudonym, and any
opposition filed thereto, it is by the Court this ______ day of ________, 2016, hereby
ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED.
_____________________________________
United States District Judge
Copies To:
J. Michael Hannon
Daniel S. Crowley
333 8th Street, N.E.
Joanne E. Pollak, Esq.

General Counsel
Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation
600 N. Wolfe Street
Administration 414
Baltimore, MD 21205
Tresa Fitch
Suburban Hospital, Inc.
Bethesda, MD 20814

United States District Court For The District of Maryland

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

United States District Court For The District of Maryland

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Civil Action No.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 2 of 15

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

complained of occurred in this district.

Defendant The Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation, is a Maryland non-stock

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 3 of 15

FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

In the summer of 2013, the Medical Director of Suburbans Behavioral Health

rectified, would cause the hospital to lose its accreditation.

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 4 of 15

supervisors and to JHHSs compliance department.

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 5 of 15

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 6 of 15

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 7 of 15

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 8 of 15

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 9 of 15

Although JHHS policy requires that an employee affected by reorganization be

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 10 of 15

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 11 of 15

COUNT ONE FALSE CLAIMS RETALIATION (31 U.S.C. 3730(h))

All of the preceding allegations are incorporated herein.

of the False Claims Act and in furtherance of a qui tam action.

All of the preceding allegations are incorporated herein.

Dr. Doe objected to and refused to participate in the unlawful activities.

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 12 of 15

All of the preceding allegations are incorporated herein.

All of the preceding allegations are incorporated herein.

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 13 of 15

All of the preceding allegations are incorporated herein.

cause damage to Dr. Doe in her lawful business as a psychologist.

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 14 of 15

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe, Ed.D., requests the following relief:

All relief necessary to make Plaintiff whole;

Removal of any adverse personnel record entries based on or related to the

Any other special damages as provided by applicable statute;

Pre-judgment and post-judgment interests;

An order directing Defendants to pay reasonable attorneys fees and litigation

Such further relief as the Court deems just.

Case 8:16-cv-01635-TDC Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 15 of 15

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Dated: May 25, 2016

Jane Doe, Ed.D

The Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation and Suburban

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff

County of Residence of First Listed Defendant

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)

J. Michael Hannon & Daniel S. Crowley

(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

Attorneys (If Known)

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only)

III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff

and One Box for Defendant)

Citizen of Another State

Incorporated and Principal Place

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only)

u 625 Drug Related Seizure

FEDERAL TAX SUITS

V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only)

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause: