Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court solicited input from the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding the scrutiny with which courts should view False Claims Act complaints—particularly those filed by private plaintiff-relators.
Because a complaint filed under the False Claims Act accuses the defendant of committing fraud against the government, it must satisfy the heightened pleading standards of Federal Rule 9(b), which demand more “particularity” than normal pleadings.
In recent years, lower courts have disagreed on what details are necessary to satisfy the Rule 9(b) standard. Some courts, like those in the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits, require that the complaint includes at least one example of a false claim that was submitted for reimbursement. Advocates of this interpretation argue that it is necessary to prevent fishing expeditions and meritless claims brought by would-be relators from proceeding to what is very often a long and expensive discovery process.
Other courts, like those in the Fifth and Ninth Circuits, require that the complaint provides only “reliable indicia” that false claims were submitted. Advocates of this interpretation argue that requiring example claims is too limiting because many whistleblowers who uncover fraud may not have access to the defendant’s billing systems, even though they have personally witnessed the fraud scheme in practice.
Although this issue does not often arise in cases where the DOJ has chosen to intervene—because the...
SPRINGFIELD – The Illinois Education Association (IEA) is working to pass Senate Bill 2914 this session, a bill that would put an end to a long-time practice of school administrators keeping accus...