ARTICLE
2 January 2026

CVS PBM Caremark Appeals $290M Overbilling Judgment

HB
Hall Benefits Law

Contributor

Strategically designed, legally compliant benefit plans are the cornerstone of long-term business stability and growth. As such, HBL provides comprehensive legal guidance on benefits in M&A, ESOPs, executive compensation, health and welfare benefits, retirement plans, and ERISA litigation matters. Responsive, relationship-driven counsel is the calling card of the Firm.
CVS Caremark, the pharmacy benefits manager (PBM) for CVS, has filed a notice of appeal of a $290 million judgment in a lawsuit alleging that it overbilled for Medicare Part...
United States Employment and HR
Hall Benefits Law are most popular:
  • within Immigration topic(s)

CVS Caremark, the pharmacy benefits manager (PBM) for CVS, has filed a notice of appeal of a $290 million judgment in a lawsuit alleging that it overbilled for Medicare Part D-sponsored drugs. The judgment was increased from $95 million to $290 million in August 2025 in an order from a Pennsylvania federal district court that included treble damages for Caremark's "serious" misconduct under the False Claims Act. The judge increased the damages in large part because of Caremark's "financially motivated" fraud, rather than an innocent or mistaken belief.

Whistleblower and former Aetna head actuary Sarah Behnke filed suit against Caremark in 2014, alleging that Caremark overbilled the federal government by $240 to $330 million. Behnke alleged that Caremark violated federal law that requires PBMs to report "pass-through" prices, leading to millions in fraudulent Medicare claims dating back to 2007. Caremark purportedly failed to report its Generic Effective Rate (GER) guarantees with various pharmacies, which are meant to hold down the price of generic drugs, to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Caremark reportedly charged CMS for the drugs at higher prices than its GERs at Rite Aid, Walgreens, and CVS.

The case is U.S. ex rel. Sarah Behnke v. CVS Caremark Corp. et al., case number 2:14-cv-00824, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The appeal is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More