Insights
Publications

Congressional Action May Open The Door To A New Wave Of Fraud and False Claims Act Litigation

5/18/2009 Articles

Driven by increasing pressure to halt financial fraud and prevent misuse of government stimulus money, as well as continued concern about reported government contractor and Medicare abuses, Congress is revamping the False Claims Act for use as a serious fraud-fighting weapon. 

On May 6, the "Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act" (FERA) passed the House and it is expected to be signed into law by President Obama soon. 

FERA contains provisions extending the coverage of the FCA to any false or fraudulent claim for government money or property, whether or not the claim is presented to a government official or employee, whether or not the government has title to the money, whether or not a contract exists, whether or not the claimant specifically intended to defraud the government, and -- in the case of reverse false claims -- whether or not any statement about the obligation is submitted to the government at all.  FERA also codifies the lower materiality standard ("natural tendency to influence") recently affirmed by the Supreme Court in the Brouseau case and broadens the definition of a government "claim" to include any request for money "to be spent or used on the Government's behalf or to advance a Government program or interest." 

The net effect of the pending FERA changes is a sweeping increase in the power of the government and private whistleblowers to pursue alleged fraud using the FCA. 

Other pending legislation -- particularly the "False Claims Act Clarification Act of 2009" -- also aims to increase the tools available to investigate and prosecute financial fraud.  These congressional efforts are likely to usher in a new era of increasing fraud and False Claims Act litigation by both the government and private plaintiffs. 

Given the pending changes to the FCA, it is more important than ever that companies receiving government money educate their employees regarding the Act and institute strict internal controls to safeguard against the submission of inaccurate claims or statements to the government.  Combined with regular FCA monitoring, the money and time spent on these internal efforts represent the best way to avoid the much more costly consequences of becoming a FCA target in the government's new war on fraud.

About the Author:  Stephanie Skaff is a partner in the firm's Business Litigation Group and is well-known for her experience litigating high-profile fraud and False Claims Act cases.  Ms. Skaff served as co-lead counsel in connection with a multi-million dollar false claims action involving the construction of the San Francisco International Airport and, prior to that, helped negotiate what continues to be the largest recovery to date under the California False Claims statute -- a $187.5 million settlement of a fraud and false claim action against a large national bank on behalf of a qui tam plaintiff, the State of California and numerous California cities, counties and local government agencies.  Ms. Skaff's current false claim practice focuses on advising companies on FCA compliance and defending against FCA claims brought by the government and/or private plaintiffs.  Ms. Skaff may be reached at [email protected].

Firm Highlights

Publication

Ensuring Your Website Complies With the ADA

In today’s digital age, having an online presence is crucial for businesses, including wineries, breweries, and other beverage companies. Accordingly, it’s essential to ensure that your beverage website meets federal standards for accessibility to avoid...

Read More
News

Farella 2024 Partner Elevations: Cynthia Castillo and Greg LeSaint

Northern California legal powerhouse Farella Braun + Martel is pleased to announce the election of two lawyers to partnership effective Jan. 1: Cynthia Castillo and Greg LeSaint. “We are thrilled to elevate Cynthia and...

Read More
Publication

Disputes Between Shareholders May Not Be Governed by Fiduciary Duties but Could Be Covered by Insurance

(As published in Private Company Director ) Disputes regarding ownership interests often arise in the context of closely held corporations, particularly when directors, officers, or majority shareholders sell or acquire ownership interests in the...

Read More
Publication

Major Decision Affects Law of Scraping and Online Data Collection, Meta Platforms v. Bright Data

On January 23, 2024, the court in Meta Platforms Inc. v. Bright Data Ltd. , Case No. 3:23-cv-00077-EMC (N.D. Cal.), issued a summary judgment ruling with potentially wide-ranging ramifications for the law of scraping and...

Read More
Publication

Reporting Dispute Claims Within Closely Held Wineries

Many wineries operate as closely held companies, meaning they’re owned by an individual or small group of shareholders, who are often members of the same family. Disputes regarding ownership interests can arise, particularly when directors...

Read More
News

Scraping Battles: Meta Loses Legal Effort to Halt Harvesting of Personal Profiles

Alex Reese spoke to Matt Fleischer-Black of  Cybersecurity Law Report about the Meta v. Bright Data decision and its impact on U.S. scraping case law. Read the article here (paywall or trial).

Read More
Publication

Wire Fraud Victims Have New Reporting Factors After Ciminelli

Originally published by  Bloomberg Law . Courts around the country have seen an influx of challenges to indictments and convictions since the US Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in  Ciminelli v. United States  last May...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Earns 2024 Best Law FirmsĀ® Rankings

Read More
News

Farella Wins Complete Defense Ruling at Trial for Smart Meter Technology Company

Northern California legal powerhouse Farella Braun + Martel secured a complete defense victory for a smart meter technology company following a two-week bench trial in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California...

Read More
Publication

Compelling Employees to Arbitration Suddenly Has Less of an Upside

On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Adolph v. Uber Techs Inc., as to whether employees still have standing to sue for "non-individual" PAGA claims when they have been...

Read More