Whistleblower law firm Phillips & Cohen named to prestigious “Plaintiffs’ Hot List” for 2016

WASHINGTON, DC, March 14, 2016 – The National Law Journal named Phillips & Cohen LLP to its “Plaintiffs’ Hot List” for 2016, noting the firm shows great care for its whistleblower clients while helping to secure large recoveries for the government and substantial rewards for its clients.

“When it comes to whistleblowers, Phillips & Cohen dispenses more than legal advice,” says the NLJ in an article about the law firm.

A Phillips & Cohen client, Robert Baker, told NLJ that being a whistleblower was “emotionally draining.” But Baker, who ultimately received $18 million for his invaluable help in the case, added that Philips & Cohen and partner Peter Chatfield “always protected not just my interest from a financial point of view but my well-being.”

NLJ highlighted two of Phillips & Cohen’s whistleblower cases that were settled last year. One was against Adventist Health System, which agreed to pay $118.7 million to settle two False Claims Act suits alleging Adventist improperly compensated doctors for referrals to Adventist hospitals. In a separate matter, Phillips & Cohen worked closely with the government to pursue a whistleblower case against Community Health Systems, which paid $75 million to resolve Medicaid fraud allegations involving several CHS-owned hospitals in New Mexico.

Phillips & Cohen, one of only 12 firms named in the 2016 “Plaintiffs’ Hot List,” had great success for its whistleblower clients and significant growth over the last year. The law firm helped governments recover $294 million from eight settlements in 2015 and opened new offices in London and Miami.

“This was a good year in terms of significant cases in a single year that added up to be a big amount,” Chatfield said.

This is the second consecutive year and seventh time the NLJ has recognized Phillips & Cohen’s work for its whistleblower clients by selecting the firm for the exclusive “Plaintiffs’ Hot List.”

Let us help you.
Get a free, confidential case review