1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |False Claim Need Not Be "Presented" By Defendant

False Claim Need Not Be "Presented" By Defendant

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.20.05

In the latest in a series of cases interpreting the False Claims Act's "presentment" element, the court in U.S. v. Sequel Contractors, Inc., 2005 WL 3307026 (C.D. Cal., Nov. 14, 2005), held that a contractor submitting a false claim for payment to its county-government customer, which then submitted a request for partial reimbursement to the federal government, could be liable under the FCA, because the statute only requires that someone (in this case the county-government customer), and not necessarily the defendant itself, "present" the false claim to the federal government, as long as the defendant "causes" the ultimate presentation. The court also held that, although actionable false claims must be made "knowingly," the knowledge in question is knowledge of the claim's falsity, not knowledge that the ultimate recipient of the claim would be the federal government.

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.25.26

DOJ Signals Increased Antitrust Scrutiny of Algorithmic Pricing in Willow Bridge Decision

Algorithmic pricing tools commonly used by businesses to increase efficiency and profits are under increasing antitrust scrutiny. This summer, federal regulators, state attorneys general, and state legislatures grappled with competing businesses providing nonpublic, competitively sensitive data to common algorithmic platforms. The Third Circuit deepened an emerging circuit split with the Ninth Circuit on algorithmic pricing liability, reviving antitrust claims against Atlantic City casino-hotels in a decision with direct implications for any company that uses a common pricing platform. See Crowell’s recent client alert. And New Jersey enacted two landmark laws—the FAIR Act and the Fair Price Protection Act—directly regulating algorithmic rent-setting and surveillance pricing. See Crowell’s recent client alert....