XML 34 R21.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.23.1

Commitments and Contingencies | 3 Months Ended
--- | ---
Mar. 31, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and ContingenciesIn the normal course of business, the Company is subject to loss contingencies, such as legal proceedings and claims arising out of its business that cover a wide range of matters. In accordance with FASB ASC Topic 450, Accounting for Contingencies, the Company records accruals for such loss contingencies when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Significant judgment is required to determine both probability and the estimated amount. The Company reviews its accruals at least quarterly and adjusts accordingly to reflect the impact of negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel, and updated information. At this time, the Company has no material accruals related to lawsuits, claims, investigations and proceedings. While there can be no assurance, based on the Company’s evaluation of information currently available, the Company’s management believes any liability that may ultimately result from resolution of such loss contingencies will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial conditions or results of operations. However, the Company’s assessment may be affected by limited information. Accordingly, the Company’s assessment may change in the future based upon availability of new information and further developments in the proceedings of such matters. The results of legal proceedings are inherently uncertain, and material adverse outcomes are possible. On July 25, 2017, AdaptHealth Holdings was served with a subpoena by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (“EDPA”) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3486 to produce certain audit records and internal communications regarding ventilator billing. The investigation focused on billing practices regarding one payor that contracted for bundled payments for certain ventilators. AdaptHealth Holdings has cooperated with investigators and, through agreement with the EDPA, has submitted all information requested in the Company’s possession. An independent third party was retained by AdaptHealth Holdings that identified overpayments and underpayments for ventilator billings related to the payor, and a remittance was sent to reconcile that account. On October 3, 2019, the Company received a follow-up civil investigative demand from the EDPA regarding a document previously produced to the EDPA and patients included in the review by the independent third party. The Company has responded to the EDPA and supplemented its production as requested with any relevant documents in the Company’s possession. During subsequent communications, the EDPA indicated to the Company that the investigation remained ongoing. The EDPA also requested additional information regarding certain patient services and claims refunds processed by the Company in 2017. The Company produced this information in coordination with the EDPA. The EDPA also raised questions regarding other aspects of ventilator billing. On April 21, 2023, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with the EDPA resolving all allegations and claims related to the investigation without a determination of liability on the part of the Company. In connection with the settlement, the Company made a payment of $5.3 million and was not required to enter into any post-settlement agreements related to the settlement. In March 2019, prior to its acquisition by the Company, AeroCare Holdings, Inc. (AeroCare) was served with a civil investigative demand (CID) issued by the United States Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky (WDKY). The CID seeks to investigate allegations that AeroCare improperly billed, or caused others to improperly bill, for oxygen tank contents that were not delivered to beneficiaries. The WDKY has requested documents related to such oxygen tank content billing as well as other categories of information. AeroCare has cooperated with the WDKY and has produced documents and provided explanations of its billing practices. In September 2020, the WDKY indicated the investigation includes alleged violations of the federal False Claims Act and as well as alleged violations of state Medicaid false claims acts in ten states. AeroCare has cooperated fully with the investigation and has indicated to the WDKY that concerns raised do not accurately identify Medicare coverage criteria and that state Medicaid coverage requirements generally do not provide for separate reimbursement for portable gaseous oxygen contents in the circumstances at issue. On June 23, 2022, the complaint filed in connection with this investigation was dismissed by the United States District Court in the Western District of Kentucky with the consent of the WDKY. On July 29, 2021, Robert Charles Faille Jr., a purported shareholder of the Company, filed a purported class action complaint against the Company and certain of its current and former officers in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (the “Complaint”). The Complaint purports to be asserted on behalf of a class of persons who purchased the Company’s stock between November 11, 2019 and July 16, 2021. The Complaint generally alleges that the Company and certain of its current and former officers violated federal securities laws by making allegedly false and misleading statements and/or failing to disclose material information regarding the Company’s organic growth trajectory. The Complaint seeks unspecified damages. On October 14, 2021, the Delaware County Employees Retirement System and the Bucks County Employees Retirement System were named Lead Plaintiffs. Pursuant to the scheduling order, Lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint on November 22, 2021 (the “Consolidated Complaint”), which asserts substantially the same claim, but adds a number of current and former directors of the Company as additional defendants and a new theory of recovery based on the Company’s alleged failure to disclose information concerning the Company’s former Co-CEO’s alleged tax fraud arising from certain past private activity (the “Consolidated Class Action”). On January 20, 2022, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint. Lead Plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ motion was filed on March 21, 2022, and defendants’ reply was filed April 15, 2022. On June 9, 2022, the court issued an opinion and order denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint. On July 15, 2022, the court entered a scheduling order providing for, inter alia, a schedule for completing class certification discovery, as well as setting a briefing schedule for motions for class certification. Pursuant to the scheduling order, Lead Plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification on July 28, 2022. On December 12, 2022, the court entered an amended scheduling order with respect to class certification discovery and remaining briefing on Lead Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Pursuant to the amended scheduling order, the defendants filed their opposition to Lead Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification on March 30, 2023; and Lead Plaintiffs’ reply is due to be filed on May 22, 2023. Oral argument on Lead Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification is scheduled for June 13, 2023. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations contained in the Consolidated Complaint, but there can be no assurance that the defense will be successful. On December 6, 2021, a putative shareholder of the Company, Carol Hessler, filed a shareholder derivative complaint against certain current and former directors and officers of the Company in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (the “Derivative Complaint”). The Derivative Complaint generally alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties owed to the Company by allegedly causing or allowing misrepresentations and/or omissions regarding the Company’s organic growth and the Company’s former Co-CEO’s alleged criminal activity, failing to maintain an adequate system of oversight, disclosure controls and procedures, and internal controls over financial reporting and due diligence into the Company’s management team, and engaging in insider trading. The Derivative Complaint also alleges claims for waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment. Finally, the Derivative Complaint alleges that certain of the individual defendants violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act by allegedly negligently issuing, causing to be issued, and participating in the issuance of materially misleading statements to stockholders in the Company’s Proxy Statements on Schedule DEF 14A in connection with a Special Meeting of Stockholders, held on March 3, 2021, and the 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, held on July 27, 2021. The Derivative Complaint seeks, among other things, an award of money damages. On March 4, 2022, the parties stipulated to stay the Hessler action pending final resolution of the Consolidated Class Action. On March 7, 2022, the court so-ordered the parties’ stipulation. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations contained in the Derivative Complaint, but there can be no assurance that the defense will be successful. On May 2, 2022, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York issued a civil investigative demand to Community Surgical Supply Inc. (CSS), a subsidiary of the Company, pursuant to the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3733 (FCA) surrounding whether CSS submitted false claims in violation of the FCA related to CSS’s billing of, and reimbursements from, federal health care programs for ventilators provided to patients from January 1, 2015 to the present. The Company is fully cooperating with the investigation. Given the investigation is in the early stages, it is not possible to determine whether it will have a material adverse effect on the Company.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration