Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Inc. v. City of Baton Rouge

United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana

October 22, 2018

AIDS HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION, INC.
v.
CITY OF BATON ROUGE/PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE, THROUGH THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE DIVISION OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES

          ORDER

          RICHARD L. BOURGEOIS, JR. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         Before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Compel. (R. Doc. 79). The motion is opposed. (R. Doc. 97). Defendant has filed a Supplemental Brief and Reply. (R. Docs. 90, 103).

         I. Background

         On April 10, 2017, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “AHF”) commenced this action, naming as defendant the City of Baton Rouge/Parish of East Baton Rouge, through the City of Baton Rouge Division of Human Development and Services (“Defendant” or “EBR”). (R. Doc. 1). AHF has twice amended the complaint. (R. Doc. 10; R. Doc. 47)

         AHF seeks declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and damages arising from EBR's decision not to renew its federally-funded Ryan White Program Contract (“Contract”) with AHF. (Doc. 10, “Am. Compl.” ¶¶ 1, 4). On October 2, 2015, EBR issued a request for proposal (“RFP”) (R. Doc. 10-1), which sought proposals from qualified public or non-profit entities to become a sub-recipient of EBR's Ryan White Program funds to assist in providing core services to persons living with HIV/AIDS. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 29, 31). AHF and EBR entered into the Contract (R. Doc. 10-2) with an effective date of March 1, 2016. (Am. Compl. ¶ 41). The Contract provided for an initial term of March 1, 2016 to February 28, 2017, and the RFP provided that “[u]p to two additional 12-month renewal awards may be made based upon the availability of funds and acceptable contract performance.” (Am. Compl. ¶ 43) (quoting R. Doc. 10-1 at 9).

         Under the Contract, AHF, a sub-recipient of EBR's federal funds, provided medical services to uninsured and underinsured people with HIV/AIDS in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. (Am. Compl. ¶ 1). AHF also participates in the 340B Program of the Public Health Services Act, 42 U.S.C. § 256b, which is a separate federal program that allows certain healthcare providers to buy drugs at discounted rates. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 2, 21). In January 2017, EBR scheduled a routine Ryan White Program monitoring review of AHF's operations related to its 2016-17 Contract. (Am. Compl. ¶ 49). Pursuant to Section XXI. “Program Income” of the Contract, EBR requested production of several documents to review, including documents regarding AHF's use of the 340B Program. (Am. Compl. ¶ 50). AHF refused to comply, explaining that it did not believe EBR had the authority to collect and review AHF's 340B documentation. (Am. Compl. ¶ 51).

         On April 18, 2017, EBR wrote to AHF to inform it of the non-renewal of the Contract due to its failure to submit documentation requested by Defendant concerning the 340B program. (Am. Compl. ¶ 70). EBR informed AHF that it would be transitioning AHF's patients to other agencies; however, some of AHF's patients indicated that they wished to continue to receive services from AHF. (Am. Compl. ¶ 70-71). AHF continued to provide these services, even though it had to pay for these services with its own funds, and has billed EBR for reimbursement. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 72-73).

         On March 2, 2018, AHF responded to EBR's discovery requests served on or about January 31, 2018. (R. Doc. 79-3). At issue is EBR's Request for Production No. 7, and AHF's responses, which are as follows:

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7:
Please produce all contracts between AHF and any grantee for Ryan White Parts A, B, C, D or F for all AHF clinics and pharmacies located in the United States of America from January 1, 2012 to the present.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7:
AHF objects to Request for Production No. 7 as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and seeking information that is not relevant to the parties' claim or defenses as it seeks all contracts between AHF and any grantee for Ryan White Parts A, B, C, D or F for all AHF clinics and pharmacies throughout the country. AHF operates more than 40 clinics and more than 40 pharmacies in the United States in fifteen different states. This lawsuit relates only to the Ryan White Part A Program in Baton Rouge, Louisiana; other Ryan White programs in other localities are not at issue. Further, EBR is already in possession of the Contract with AHF.

(R. Doc. 79-3 at 14).

         On June 22, 2018, the parties held a discovery conference in which they discussed the potential production by AHF “of the contracts for its approximately forty (40) clinics.” (R. Doc. 79-4; see R. Doc. 79 at 2). That same day, AHF agreed to produce its Part A and Part B contracts in approximately two weeks. (R. Doc. 79-5). EBR responded that it needed the contracts ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.