FCA Does Not Authorize In-House Counsel/Relator to Reveal Client Confidences
Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.18.13
In Fair Lab. Practices Assocs. v. Quest Diagnostics (Oct. 25, 2013), the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a qui tam suit that was brought by a general partnership formed for the purpose of bringing the suit because (1) the partnership included the defendant's former general counsel, and (2) the former general counsel violated his ethical obligations by divulging confidential client information in pursuit of the litigation, notwithstanding that a non-lawyer member of the partnership initiated the suit. While the Second Circuit did not create a bright-line rule barring all in-house lawyers from using client information in FCA cases, it did strike a balance between a lawyer's ethical obligations to the client and the government's competing interest in encouraging "whistleblowers" to report fraud, finding that the disclosure exceeded what was necessary to prevent the client from committing a crime.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.25.26
Recent Court Decision Highlights Effectiveness of “Second Bite” Protests
A recent U.S. Court of Federal Claims (COFC) decision serves as an important reminder that when the Government Accountability Office (GAO) denies a protest, this is not necessarily the end of the road. Often, contractors retain the right to file a new protest at the COFC, which conducts its own de novo review of the procurement record. This so-called “second bite at the apple” protest is a powerful tool as the COFC’s recent decision in Chugach Logistics & Facility Services JV, LLC v. USA makes clear.
Client Alert | 5 min read | 08.21.26
FTC Proposes Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing: What Businesses Need to Know
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.19.26
CMS’s Final Rule Bans Federal Medicaid Funding for Youth Gender-Affirming Care
