1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |State University Hospital Fends Off FCA Claims Under "Arm-of-the-State" Test

State University Hospital Fends Off FCA Claims Under "Arm-of-the-State" Test

Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.16.13

In U.S. ex rel. King v. The University of Texas Health Science Center-Houston, a federal court considered whether The University of Texas Health Science Center–Houston was subject to liability under the qui tam provisions of the federal civil False Claims Act, based on a former employee's allegations that the hospital had defrauded the federal government by covering up misconduct related to federal research grants, and retaliated against the employee for reporting the misconduct. Applying the "arm-of-the-state" test (previously discussed here), the court held that the university hospital was a state entity -- and thus, was not a "person" subject to suit under the FCA -- and likewise held that employee's FCA retaliation claim was barred by sovereign immunity, providing a victory in the latest round of FCA scrutiny impacting higher ed institutions (discussed here and here).


Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.15.26

Kansas Federal Court Applies “Selective Enforcement” Theory to Reject DTSA Claim

A Kansas federal court held that inconsistent enforcement of trade secret rights can defeat a claim under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). In Edelman Financial Engines, LLC v. Mariner Wealth Advisors LLC, No. 2:23-cv-02515-HLT (D. Kan. June 5, 2026), the court applied a selective enforcement theory, holding that when a company does not consistently pursue legal remedies against similarly situated former employees, that inconsistency can be affirmative evidence that it failed to protect its trade secrets. While the selective enforcement theory has appeared in academic hypothetical discussions, the decision appears to be one of the clearest judicial applications of a “selective enforcement” theory in a trade secret case....