On June 1, the U.S. Supreme Court published a unanimous decision in a False Claims Act (FCA) case, United States ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu, Inc., No. 21-1326. The opinion, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, was notable not only for the unanimity of the ideological factions of the Court, but also for its potential impact on future FCA cases. The SuperValu decision delivered a clear win for the relators in that case and its companion case, United States ex rel. Proctor v. Safeway, Inc., No 22-111. And while the decision has already begun to reverberate across the FCA bar, all is not lost for FCA defendants and defense counsel. Despite ruling in favor of the relators, Justice Thomas's opinion includes language and reasoning that could prove very helpful to defendants in future FCA cases. Indeed, it is not clear that the SuperValu holding will deliver consistently similar victories for future relators.
In SuperValu, the Supreme Court considered the interpretation of the FCA's scienter requirement, which imposes liability only on a defendant who "knowingly" presents a false claim to the government. Under the FCA, "knowingly" means to act with: (1) actual knowledge; (2) deliberate ignorance; or (3) reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the claim. In ruling for the relators, the Court held that a defendant can act with the requisite scienter under the FCA, and thus, a defendant could be held liable for an FCA violation if there is sufficient evidence that the...
We detected unusual activity from your device or network. Reasons may include: Rapid taps or clicks JavaScript disabled or not working Automated (bot) activity on your network (IP 216.218.191.