Court Decision

Alabama Court Reaffirms Constitutionality of False Claims Act

The False Claims Act is the government's primary tool to go after those committing fraud against the government.  One of the key features of the statute is the qui tam provisions, which allow private parties (whistleblowers) to bring suit on the government's behalf and in return, receive a hefty share of any government recovery.  The Constitutional muster of this feature has long been settled, with the statute...

District Court Rules that Broad Measure of Damages Applies in False Claims Act Case, Greatly Increasing Defendants’ Exposure

Several aspects of the federal False Claims Act incentivize the government and relators to bring fraud claims to recover damages to the government.  In addition to awarding relators typically between 15% and 30% of the proceeds of the action or settlement; awarding reasonable attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs; and applying statutory penalties for each false claim submitted; the act also provides for treble...

Jury Finds Eli Lilly Cheated Medicaid in Case Highlighting Legal Battle Over False Claims Act Intent Standard

Constantine Cannon whistleblower lawyers Marlene Koury and Leah Judge were published in Law360 on the verdict in favor of a whistleblower against Eli Lilly, and what that case says about legal developments in the interpretation of the False Claims Act since the Seventh Circuit’s SuperValu decision. This post is an adaptation of that article.

In August, a Chicago jury in the U.S. District Court for the Northern...

A recent case could undermine the rules that have been protecting taxpayer money from fraud since the time of Lincoln

Constantine Cannon whistleblower lawyers Eric Havian, Mike Ronickher, and Ari Yampolsky were published in Fortune.com on the Supreme Court's consideration of the SuperValu decision.

We’re whistleblower lawyers who spend our careers speaking in legalese. But every once in a while, a case comes along that is so alarming, yet so couched in jargon, that an issue of great importance can easily escape notice. When that...

Court says that fraudsters who violate rules they later claim are unclear may not violate the False Claims Act

Last week, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the federal appellate court for Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin decided U.S. ex rel. Yarberry v. Supervalu, an important decision that may lead more unscrupulous government contractors to help themselves to public funds to which they are not entitled.  Unless the Supreme Court or Congress steps in to correct the Seventh Circuit’s errors, the government may have...

Fifth Circuit Affirms Government Dismissal Of Cases Brought By Corporate Whistleblower

Last week, a three-judge panel of the Court of the Appeals for the Fifth Circuit sided with the government in its bid to dismiss a whistleblower case brought by a limited liability company against pharmaceutical giants Eli Lilly and Bayer.  The case offers another example of the government flexing its dismissal power in the wake of the Granston Memo, a 2018 Department of Justice directive to winnow False Claims Act...

Court of Appeals Upholds SEC Denial of Whistleblower Award

A whistleblower who was denied an award by the SEC lost his appeal to the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, resulting in a rare court opinion addressing the SEC Whistleblower Reward Program. The court agreed with the SEC that the whistleblower, who had reported information regarding Bank of America and argued that he had worked extensively with DOJ, had not shown that he was entitled to a whistleblower award from...

Eleventh Circuit Revives VA Mortgage Fraud Whistleblower Case

Last week, a three-judge panel on the Eleventh Circuit breathed new life into a fifteen-year-old mortgage fraud lawsuit brought by two whistleblowers under the False Claims Act.  The opinion, United States ex rel. Bibby v. Mortgage Investors Corporation adds another voice to the chorus of circuit courts applying the Supreme Court’s landmark 2016 ruling on the FCA’s “materiality” standard, Universal Health...

“Objective Falsity” Is Not Required Under the False Claims Act: A Legally False Opinion May Suffice

In a significant win for whistleblowers, a federal appellate court held this week that, in order to determine liability under the False Claims Act, a whistleblower need not prove that a claim is “objectively” false.  Instead, the Court held that, consistent with common law, a claim can be false under the FCA if based not on objectively verifiable facts, but on non-compliance with statutory or regulatory...

First Circuit Revives Whistleblower Suit Against PharMerica, Rejecting Public Disclosure Challenge

Rejecting an argument that only a fraudster could love, the First Circuit Court of Appeals revived a whistleblower’s lawsuit and rightly recognized that whistleblowers can have “direct” knowledge of fraud even if they did not themselves participate in the fraud. In United States ex rel. Banigan & Templin, et al. v. PharMerica, Inc., the First Circuit interpreted the so-called “original source” provision of...