CAREMARK STUDY CASE
1°) Who are the parties in the case? Plaintiff, Defendant, Remedy sought?
Plaintiff: Casemark’s shareholders
Defendant: Board of directors
Remedy sought:
- $250 million
- Institute policies to further assist in monitoring for violations.

2°) Civil or criminal? Why? Have there been criminal acts? If so, what? By whom, who was charged?
- Civil: derivative action = disagreement/dispute between the 2 parties which leads to the compensation of the plaintiff. Breach of fiduciary duty of the Directors.

3°) What is the compliance program?
- Who designed it?
- Who benefits it?
- What is its purpose?
The compliance program is the Guide to Contractual Relationships, designed by Caremark’s predecessor. The stakeholders are the people who benefit it.
The goal is to be sure that no payments will be made in exchange for or to induce patient referrals.

4°) Kickback: who is involved? Who is kicking back $ to whom? Is it important, if so why?
Casemark’s predecessor + hospitals, physicians, health care providers.
Casemark’s predecessor is kicking back $ to physicians. The doctors were supposed to recommend the insurance company to the customers. This fact is important because the customers were misled. Moreover, the fair competition principle was not respected: ARPL violation.

5°) Specific responsibilities of the Directors/management in this case?
Directors missed their fiduciary duty but the infrastructure of the company at the time was not