United States v. Robert Jack Mills, Margie B. Mills
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. Robert Jack MILLS, Margie B. Mills, Defendants-Appellants, Cross-Appellees
Opinion
PER CURIAM:
The court sua sponte grants rehearing to make the following change to the opinion published at 138 F.3d 928 .
The following text, published at 138 F.3d at 931-32, is deleted:
First American rounded out the scheme in 1991 meetings with Aetna auditors about documentation; there, Jack and First American’s counsel, Wayne Phears, denied knowing of “breaker flights”
5
and indeed berated Aetna for not trusting First American’s records.
The deleted text is replaced with the following:
In 1991 meetings with Aetna auditors about documentation, Jack and First American’s counsel, Wayne Phears, denied knowing of unreported flights 5
and indeed berated Aetna for not trusting First American’s records.
In all other respects the published opinion remains unchanged. The petitions of the United States, Margie Mills, and Jack Mills for panel rehearing are DENIED.
OPINION MODIFIED ON REHEARING; PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING DENIED.
5
One such flight to Cozumel the week before the meeting carried both Jack and Phears.
5
An unreported flight to Cozumel the week before the meeting carried both Jack and Phears.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(concluding that the defendants, officers and majority shareholders of a Medicare services provider, were entitled to resentencing without the abuse-of-trust enhancement because a Medicare- funded care provider does not occupy a position of trust vis-à-vis Medicare)
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.