On March 28, the Sixth Circuit issued an important decision on the meanings of “remuneration” and “causation” under the Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS), holding that remuneration “covers just payments and other transfers of value” and not “any act that may be valuable to another,” and that to establish False Claims Act (FCA) liability based on AKS violations, a relator or the government must prove a causal link between the alleged kickback scheme and the alleged false claim.
The Sixth Circuit joins other recent courts that have reined in broad AKS theories pursued by relators and the government.
The qui tam action, U.S. ex rel. Martin v. Hathaway, was filed by an ophthalmologist who alleged that the defendant hospital rescinded its offer of employment to her after another ophthalmologist threatened to take his referrals away from the hospital if it hired the relator and promised to continue, and even increase, his referrals to the hospital if it did not. The lawsuit alleged that the hospital’s decision not to hire the relator in return for the other ophthalmologist’s promise to continue referring patients violated the AKS, resulting in FCA violations for later claims tied to the other ophthalmologist’s referrals. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan granted the hospital’s motion to dismiss the complaint, which the Sixth Circuit upheld on appeal.
The Department of the Attorney General says the man claiming to be the state’s chief technology officer at national conferences and on online platforms is not affiliated with the state of Hawaii a...