Ethan Minkin is a seasoned attorney and has counseled clients on a wide variety of matters. His expertise includes complex transactions, healthcare regulatory matters, corporate bankruptcies and complex litigation. Ethan has handled hundreds of closings, from mergers and acquisitions to finance deals and securitizations. He has also litigated hundreds of matters in his career, having been involved in many high profile cases. Ethan has also counseled clients for cannabis related matters, including acquisitions, litigation and regulatory advice. He is currently assisting clients with cannabis regulatory issues.
As the economy continues to flourish, there is a proliferation of merger and acquisition activity in the healthcare space. We continue to see a rise in ketamine clinic acquisitions as well as investors who are starting management services organizations (“MSO”) to assist such clinics with their administrative burden. Likewise, we have seen an increase in
Many ketamine clinics enter into management agreements with management services organizations (“MSO”). The MSO provides a litany of services to the professional entities (“PE”) that are owned by healthcare providers, including billing and collections, financial and accounting services, providing space to the clinic through a lease, strategic planning, marketing, and many other types of management
The corporate practice of medicine doctrine (“CPOM”) and state anti-kickback prohibitions vary from state to state. While some states have statutory prohibitions, other states rely upon case law for CPOM. These issues are typically not heavily litigated. When there is case law covering these subjects, it is imperative to review and understand these decisions. They
In a prior post, we discussed the federal anti-kickback statute (the “AKS”) and the implications for ketamine clinics. In short, the federal AKS prohibits anyone from paying or receiving anything of value for the referral of patients where a federal government healthcare payment program is the payor (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid, VA, etc.). 42 U.S.C. §
In a prior post, we discussed some of the various Federal laws that apply when a ketamine clinic is a Medicare provider (or accepts reimbursement from another Federal program, like Medicaid, the VA, etc.). Click here to review the post. While other Federal laws apply in these situations (e.g., the Stark Law, the Federal False
Excitement abounds about the status of MDMA, otherwise known as Ecstasy. And for good reason. As noted last month in the New York Times: …those who received MDMA during therapy [in clinical trials] experienced a significantly greater reduction in the severity of their symptoms compared with those who received therapy and an inactive placebo. Two
In prior posts, we discussed some of the common due diligence and compliance issues for ketamine clinics (see here and here). In this post, we discuss a healthcare compliance plan and the importance of having one in place for ketamine clinics. The Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) (which houses, among other agencies, the
A common question that arises in Ketamine clinic transactions is whether a clinic or physician (collectively, “healthcare providers” or “providers”) can use or promote Ketamine for off-label uses. The short answer is yes, subject to several caveats, as discussed below. However, before reaching the answer, it is important to define what “off-label” use means and
We have worked on several ketamine acquisitions, and one of the most important aspects of any deal is due diligence. Shortly after term sheets or letters of intent are executed, most buyers send out a due diligence request list to the seller. This post will focus on the healthcare regulatory issues a buyer will want
