On March 29, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida held that in order to engage in protected conduct under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), a plaintiff must specifically suspect that their employer has made a false claim for payment to the federal government; vague suspicions of fraud or misuse of funds is not enough. Swartz v. Interventional Rehabilitation of South Florida, Inc., No. 21-14137 (S.D. Fla. 2022).
Background
Plaintiff, a physician who worked for a pain management practice, sued his former employer for retaliation under both the federal False Claims Act and the Florida Whistleblower Act. Plaintiff alleged that he was terminated after he sent four emails raising concerns about the employer’s policy on recording medical information. The employer maintained that it made the termination decision before Plaintiff sent the emails after it received several complaints from other employees that he had engaged in unprofessional behavior.
Ruling
The court granted summary judgment in favor of the employer as to both retaliation claims. To bring a retaliation claim under both federal and Florida law, a plaintiff must first show that they engaged in protected activity. To engage in “protected activity” under the FCA, a plaintiff must object to a false claim for payment to the federal government. Citing precedent from the Eleventh Circuit, the court concluded that “it is not enough for an employee to ‘suspect fraud’ or ‘suspect misuse of federal...
Read Full Story:
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/florida-district-court-limits-scope-prot...