FCA Settlement Does Not Bar Third-Party Claims
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.03.09
In Cell Therapeutics Inc. v. Lash Group Inc. (9th Cir. Nov. 18, 2009), the Ninth Circuit ruled that an FCA settlement entered into between a drug manufacturer and the government and relator did not preclude the drug manufacturer from bringing state common law claims against an expert in Medicare reimbursement protocol for having allegedly advised that the false Medicare billings were proper. Although a company found to have violated the FCA may not shift its FCA liability to a third party, the suit was not foreclosed because, first, "independent" claims for damages were asserted; and, second, a settlement agreement without an admission of FCA liability does not constitute a finding of FCA liability, which could preclude recovery against a third party.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability
On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
