Skip to main content

AMAGANSETT DOCTOR SENTENCED TO PRISON FOR WRITING ILLEGAL PRESCRIPTIONS TO MEDICAID RECIPIENTS

HAUPPAUGE, NY (October 1, 2009) - Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo today announced that Michael Chait, M.D., an Amagansett physician charged in 2007 with writing hundreds of illegal prescriptions for patients from the Bronx and Manhattan, was sentenced to 3 years in prison followed by 5 years of post-release supervision.

On April 3, 2009, Chait, 48, pleaded guilty to Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Second Degree, Conspiracy in the Second Degree, and Grand Larceny in the Second Degree, all felonies. Since his arrest, Chait has been held in the Suffolk County Correctional Center on $500,000 bail. He was sentenced today before Suffolk County Court Judge C. Randall Hinrichs. Chait previously surrendered his license to practice medicine.

“This scheme to provide black-market pharmaceuticals was not only incredibly dangerous and irresponsible, it was an outrageous fleecing of the taxpayer-funded Medicaid program,” said Attorney General Cuomo. “This doctor violated his oath and the law by trading medical ethics for financial gain at great peril to his patients.”

An investigation conducted by the Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit and various city, state, and federal agencies found that Chait wrote unnecessary prescriptions that put huge quantities of highly addictive and dangerous painkillers - including OxyContin, an opium derivative, and Dilaudid - worth millions of dollars on the black market.

Between January 1 and March 16, 2007, Chait sold the narcotic prescriptions to Medicaid recipients - up to 50 patients per day - who were taken from New York City to his practice in the Town of East Hampton on the eastern end of Long Island. Once purchased, patients would use their Medicaid cards to obtain the medications from New York City pharmacies, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in medically unnecessary Medicaid billings.

The case was prosecuted by Robert J. Goldstein and Gilbert Epstein of the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit. The Medicaid Fraud Control Unit was assisted in this investigation by the Special Narcotics Prosecutor for New York City, the New York State Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s Drug Diversion Unit, New York City’s Human Resources Administration’s Bureau of Fraud Investigations, Suffolk County’s East End Drug Task Force, and the East Hampton Town Police Department.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...