Articles and Blogs

Several FCA opinions have been issued since the last FCA Update. The most interesting is a District of Nevada case, US ex rel Guardiola v Renown Health. Renown Health was the parent company for two other corporate defendants that provided acute health care services. The relator was Renown’s Director of Clinical Compliance. She alleged Renown improperly billed... READ MORE

In a new case from the Southern District of Ohio, US_v_MillenniumRadiology, the court denied a motion to dismiss a False Claims Act suit, finding that compliance with a safe harbor could only be raised on summary judgment. The court also found that uncompensated service as a medical director could form the basis for a False Claims... READ MORE

From October 1 through October 12, 2014, there were 14 federal cases reported that mentioned the False Claims Act. One was previously discussed in the September 2014 FCA Update. Eight more only tangentially discussed the False Claims Act. Five cases might be of interest to parties and counsel in a False Claims Act suit. US... READ MORE

Only one FCA case of interest was decided by a U.S. Circuit Court in September. In US ex rel Parikh v Brown, the Court found that a county hospital and its administrator’s participation in a “simple, brazen kickback scheme” could not be shielded by qualified immunity. The hospital and its administrator split pain center revenues with... READ MORE

Three new FCA cases of interest were reported in the last few weeks. One was discussed previously on FCADefense.com in Toumey Loses Stark/FCA Case Again by Drew Howk. Another, Ulysses, Inc. v. United States is yet another example of the growing trend of failed FCA counter-claims by the Government in response to contract litigation. The Third, Fresenius... READ MORE

Jury verdicts in False Claims Act litigation are rare. Two in the same case are rarer still. On May 8, 2013, after just over four hours of deliberation, a jury in the Federal District Court of South Carolina returned a verdict for the Government, finding that the Tuomey Healthcare System violated both the Stark... READ MORE

False Claims Act defense attorneys have been warning government contractors, particularly Medicare and Medicaid providers, of increased risks and a reduced ability to defend against whistleblower complaints since the passage of the Fraud Enforcement Recovery Act of 2009 (“FERA”). The greatest risk comes from FERA’s addition of a new kind of reverse false claim:... READ MORE

By David B. Honig and Andrew B. Howk In U.S. v. MedQuest, the Sixth Circuit held that violations by a provider of conditions of participation in Medicare were insufficient as a matter of law to “trigger the hefty fines and penalties created by the FCA.” This case was a reaffirmation by the Sixth Circuit... READ MORE

The recent amendments to the False Claims Act, the Fraud Enforcement Recovery Act of 2009 (“FERA”), the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (“PPACA”), and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”) continue to generate new rules and guidance. Effective 2007, Congress created incentives for States to pass and enforce mirror FCA statutes... READ MORE

Appellate Court Cases Three appellate-level FCA cases were reported in January and February 2013. Only one, U.S. ex rel. Nathan v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc., was selected for publication. All three cases addressed Rule 9(b)’s requirement that allegations of fraud be lead “with particularity.” The cases, read together, highlight the differences among Circuits... READ MORE