In this issue:

• Department of Justice (DOJ) authors amicus brief in Supervalu case before SCOTUS
• A hospital survives summary judgment on its claim that defendants filed a false FCA action in bad faith to interfere with its business
• Detroit Land Board Authority settles TARP-Related FCA claim
• Ninth Circuit to wrestle with Court of International Trade jurisdictional issue

Confusing Regulations No Excuse, DOJ Argues

United States ex rel. Schutte v. Supervalu Inc., Nos. 21-1326 & 22-111.

With four separate groups having already filed amicus briefs, DOJ has submitted its own brief in the combined Supervalu and Safeway cases before the Supreme Court. Before the Court is the contentious issue of whether under the False Claims Act (FCA) a "reasonable interpretation" of a regulation renders their "subjective intent" legally irrelevant in determining liability. The Seventh Circuit sided with the defendant pharmacies, affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment.

DOJ urged the Court to reverse the Seventh Circuit, arguing that defendants should not escape liability by claiming they followed a reasonable interpretation of a given regulations, regardless of their subjective intent in doing so. DOJ further argued that the FCA's definition of knowledge already provides for liability where a defendant has subjective intent and that the Seventh Circuit's ruling overly restricted these definitions. DOJ also relied on the Safeco decision from 2007 where the Court interpreted...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMiZWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lm1vbmRhcS5jb20vdW5p...