Lawyers with Patterson Belknap have filed a motion accusing a BakerHostetler partner, Lee H. Rosebush, of evasive deposition answers, stating that he should sit for repeat questioning at the offices of a special master. The motion alleges that Rosebush “consistently interposed lengthy, non-responsive, and scripted answers to even the most basic questions.” The special master, Dennis Cavanaugh, should direct Rosebush to answer questions in the new deposition and intervene “to prevent the recurrence of Rosebush’s misconduct,” the motion says. Rosebush is a defendant in a lawsuit filed by Roche Diagnostics Corp. alleging he aided an insurance fraud scheme for BakerHostetler’s then-client, Alliance Medical Holdings. The deposition motion alleges Rosebush “played an integral role in the fraud by facilitating its concealment.”
The lawsuit filed by Roche Diagnostics Corp. has been combined with a suit by LifeScan Inc. for discovery. The companies allege Alliance billed insurers for more expensive strips packaged for retail sale rather than the less expensive mail-order strips it had purchased on the secondary market. BakerHostetler is also named as a defendant in a suit by a bankruptcy trustee for Alliance that alleges the scheme caused the makers of diabetes test strips to wrongly pay more than $100 million in rebates. That suit claims BakerHostetler installed Rosebush on Alliance’s board of directors “to cement the close relationship between Alliance and Baker.”
The deposition was intended to establish that Rosebush knew of and participated in the fraud. Still, Rosebush would change the subject when he didn’t want to answer, preferring to discuss pharmacy benefit manager audits. The motion says, “Whenever a truthful answer would reflect poorly on him,” Rosebush “would veer off course and reiterate—often with identical words, emphases, cadence, and gestures—his scripted and completely non-responsive, speech about the nature of the PBM audits.” When lawyers for the test-strip companies followed up on the “wholly non-responsive answers,” Rosebush’s lawyer would assert meritless “asked-and-answered” objections.
The allegations in this case are serious, as they involve accusations of insurance fraud and misrepresentations to insurers regarding the price of diabetes test strips. The lawsuits by Roche Diagnostics Corp. and LifeScan Inc. for discovery and the bankruptcy trustee suit all seek to recover damages resulting from the alleged fraud. Rosebush’s evasive deposition answers could significantly impact the outcome of these cases, as they could be used to establish his knowledge of and participation in the fraud. If the special master determines that Rosebush’s answers were indeed evasive, it could lead to further questioning and additional evidence being brought to light.
This case is just one example of the importance of truthful and transparent testimony during legal proceedings. The integrity of the legal system depends on individuals being truthful and forthcoming in their statements, whether during a deposition, trial, or other legal proceedings. When lawyers and witnesses attempt to evade questions or provide scripted answers, it undermines the entire system and can lead to unjust outcomes. Individuals involved in legal proceedings must take their obligations to provide truthful testimony seriously and do their best to cooperate with the legal process. Failure to do so can result in severe consequences, including sanctions, fines, and criminal charges.