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 | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
On April 30, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a significant ruling in an insurance coverage dispute between a commercial general liability insurer and its policyholder. The decision addresses several critical issues in insurance law, including the scope and continuity of the duty to defend and the standard for insurer reimbursement of defense costs in mixed-claim actions. The court ruled largely in favor of the insured, SVO Building One, LLC ("SVO"), and the matter now heads toward settlement or trial on SVO's remaining counterclaims.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
Client Alert | 5 min read | 05.29.26
Clover Insurance v. HHS: S.D. of Georgia Holds 20 Star Ratings Measures Unlawful
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.29.26
