The Dimitri Dermatology lawsuit is a federal False Claims Act case accusing the Louisiana practice, its founder Dr. Elizabeth Dimitri, and two affiliated physicians of defrauding Medicare, Louisiana Medicaid, and Mississippi Medicaid through years of inflated and fabricated billing. Filed by whistleblowers in July 2018, the case gained significant weight in September 2024 when the United States and the State of Louisiana intervened. As of March 2026, it remains pending and is in discovery.
What the Whistleblowers Allege
The complaint describes a practice-wide pattern rather than isolated errors. According to the filing, providers at the clinics either participated in or approved billing schemes designed to pull more money out of government healthcare programs than the services warranted.
The alleged conduct falls into several categories:
- Upcoding — billing simpler procedures at higher reimbursement levels and logging patient visits as longer than they actually were.
- Unbundling — splitting a single course of care into multiple unnecessary sessions to generate extra claims.
- Medically unnecessary procedures — performing and billing for treatments such as phototherapy and Botox injections after intentionally misdiagnosing patients to justify them.
- Disguising cosmetic services — billing cosmetic Botox as treatment for covered conditions like chronic migraines and axillary hyperhidrosis, because Medicare does not pay for cosmetic use.
- False provider names — submitting claims for work done by providers not enrolled in Medicare or Medicaid under the names of enrolled physicians.
- Botox dilution — diluting Botox beyond the manufacturer’s recommended levels while billing government programs for full-strength doses.
Who Was Sued
The named defendants are Dr. E.M. Dimitri, D.O.; Dimitri Dermatology; Mississippi Dermatology, a related corporate entity also operated by Dr. Dimitri; Dr. Joel Perdomo; and Dr. Steven Shapiro. Dr. Dimitri founded the practice in 2007 and runs multiple clinic locations in Louisiana, along with the Mississippi entity across state lines. Perdomo and Shapiro are alleged to have participated in or approved the billing practices described in the complaint. None of the defendants has been found liable, and all deny the allegations.
The original qui tam complaint was filed on July 24, 2018 by relators represented by Brown, LLC. The filing name indicates the lead relator’s surname is Albores. The suit was brought under both the federal False Claims Act and the Louisiana Medical Assistance Programs Integrity Law, statutes that let private individuals sue on the government’s behalf when they have evidence of fraud against public programs.
Government Intervention
On September 25, 2024, the United States and the State of Louisiana intervened and filed their own complaint in intervention. Intervention means federal and state prosecutors reviewed the whistleblowers’ allegations and decided to prosecute the case directly alongside them. The intervention also expanded the case to cover claims involving the Mississippi Medicaid program, bringing all three government payors into the same litigation.
Where the Case Stands
The defendants moved to dismiss the federal and state claims. The court denied the motion, and the case moved into discovery, the phase in which both sides exchange evidence. As of March 2026, the United States, the State of Louisiana, and the original whistleblowers are all continuing to pursue the litigation.
Everything described in the complaint is still an allegation. No court has made any finding of liability. If the government ultimately prevails, the False Claims Act allows treble damages, meaning defendants can be ordered to pay three times the government’s loss, plus civil penalties for each false claim submitted.
A Separate Malpractice Matter
Dimitri Dermatology has also appeared as a defendant in an unrelated medical malpractice claim brought by a patient named Shavonda Pinkney, alongside Dr. Thomas J. Orgeron, tied to a December 6, 2022 incident. That case was resolved on a procedural ground: the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal held on October 7, 2024 that the claim had been filed one day outside Louisiana’s one-year window and dismissed it, noting that “arguments of counsel are not evidence.”1Leagle. Pinkney v. Orgeron, 2024 CW 0694 The malpractice matter has no connection to the billing fraud allegations.2Justia. Pinkney v. Orgeron, 2024 CW 0694