The False Claims Act’s “public disclosure bar” calls for dismissal of complaints by qui tam plaintiffs (or “relators”) whose allegations have already been publicly disclosed. The primary aim of the bar is preventing parasitic suits based on public information. Courts generally agree that disclosure to the government alone does not count as disclosure to the… Continue Reading
The public disclosure bar is a statutorily created hurdle that plaintiffs must cross to successfully maintain a False Claims Act suit. The principle was originally enacted to prevent individuals from filing “parasitic” False Claims Act (FCA) lawsuits that were not based on their independent knowledge. The public disclosure bar has undergone several statutory changes during… Continue Reading
A recent decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit evaluated whether a regulatory requirement was sufficiently ambiguous that it precluded a finding of liability under the False Claims Act (FCA). United States ex rel. Purcell v. MWI Corporation involved the sale of water pumps to Nigeria. The relator… Continue Reading
It is often stated that the sine qua non (the indispensable and essential action) of a violation of the False Claims Act (FCA) is the submission of a false or fraudulent claim. This principle has been recognized and cited in federal courts throughout the country. A recent case that was decided in the United States… Continue Reading
The qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA) are broad in scope and permit a wide array of individuals to pursue FCA litigation as relators acting on behalf of the Government. However, the ability of individuals to pursue FCA litigation on behalf of the Government is not unfettered. For example, a member of… Continue Reading
In United States ex rel. Wilhelm v. Molina Healthcare of Florida, No. 12-24298, 2015 WL 5562313 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 22, 2015), the court provided further clarification on two frequently litigated issues of the FCA’s public disclosure bar: (1) whether the date of filing or the date of the alleged FCA violation controls for determining which… Continue Reading
The first to file bar is a limitation on the rights of members of the public to commence certain litigation under the FCA. In essence, the first to file bar prevents a member of the public from commencing an action based upon facts that have already been placed at issue in another piece of FCA litigation. Specifically, “[w]hen a person brings an action… Continue Reading
The cost and risk associated with allegations under the FCA create a heightened importance on defining the scope of the claims that are at issue. Accordingly, the applicable statute of limitations is critical in determining both whether allegations of FCA are timely filed and in limiting the extent of the claims at issue if the… Continue Reading
In United States ex rel. Holmes v. Northrop Grumman Corp., No. 1:13-cv-85, 2015 WL 3504525 (S.D. Miss. June 3, 2015), the court answered this question with a resounding “no” and provided a laundry list of ethical violations that the attorney Relator had violated in attempting to advance his qui tam action. The Holmes court’s holding… Continue Reading
On Wednesday the Supreme Court, in Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter, No. 12-1497 (2015), held that the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (“WSLA”) only tolls the statute of limitations for criminal offenses, not civil claims under the False Claims Act (“FCA”). The Court also held that the FCA’s… Continue Reading
Although a Federal district court refrained from providing a definitive answer to this question, it appears unlikely given the court’s holding and reasoning in United States v. U.S. Bank, N.A., No. 3:13-cv-704, 2015 WL 2238660 (N.D. Ohio May 12, 2015). Advocates for Basic Legal Equality, Inc. (“ABLE”), a non-profit law firm focused on assisting low… Continue Reading
On May 1, 2015, in United States ex rel. Jacobs v. Lambda Res., Inc., No. 14-3705, 2015 WL 1948247 (6th Cir. May 1, 2015), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s award of sanctions against a relator and his attorney and in doing so put aspiring relators and their counsel on notice… Continue Reading
In recent years, there has been a steadily increasing number of cases that have been brought under the False Claims Act by qui tam relators (whistleblowers). Between 2008 and 2014, the number of False Claims cases filed by such whistleblowers has grown from 379 cases filed in 2008 to 713 such cases being filed in… Continue Reading
In Gunn v. Credit Suisse Group AG., No. 13-4738, 2015 WL 1787011, — F. App’x — (3d Cir. Apr. 21, 2015) (unpublished), the Third Circuit joined the District of Columbia, Second, Fourth, Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits, in holding that a pro se relator cannot maintain a qui tam action after the government has declined to… Continue Reading
We use cookies to enhance your experience of our website. By continuing to use this website, you agree to the use of these cookies. For more information and to learn how you can change your cookie settings, please see our policy.