Steven Grigas is a former interim Medicaid Director, Assistant Deputy Secretary, Deputy General Counsel, and Chief Medicaid Counsel for the State of Florida. In his various capacities, he has presided over the State's $15 billion Medicaid program with particular focus in managed care, disease management, pharmacy services, long term care, and hospital services. Steven is knowledgeable in Medicaid policies and procedures, reimbursement issues, program integrity, and fraud control. His knowledge is recognized throughout Florida in these areas and he has made numerous presentations regarding the Medicaid program at both the state and federal level. Steven is also an accomplished litigator with experience in administrative, state, and federal courts.
State of Florida v. The American Tobacco Company, et al. — I was the representative attorney for one of the plaintiffs, Agency for Health Care Administration ("AHCA"),
in the State of Florida's litigation against the tobacco industry. Working with outside counsel, and
the Office of the Attorney General for Florida, this case ultimately was resolved by a multi-year,
billion dollar settlement that helped to set the stage for similar litigation in other states. Prior to
settlement, litigation efforts included depositions, discovery, and motion hearings
before the Special Master assigned to the case.
E.D.S. v. State of Florida, H.R.S. — I was a member of the trial team representing the State of Florida, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services ("HRS")
in a multi-year, breach of contract case brought by Electronic Data Systems ("EDS"). At the heart of this dispute was a contract
for a centralized computing system that linked all social services programs of the State. This complex litigation was presided over
by special Master William Webster, and involved significant discovery, deposition, and trial work.
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA") v. Meadows — I was part of the team defending this challenge by PhRMA before the Eleventh Circuit, United States
Court of Appeals. At issue were various aspects of the State's enactment of a preferred drug formulary that was
implemented as a cost saving measure for the State's Medicaid program.