1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |False Statement Liability Involving Federal Grantees Curtailed Again

False Statement Liability Involving Federal Grantees Curtailed Again

Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.01.04

Musing that, if 18 U.S.C. 1001 were interpreted to prohibit any false statements to any private entity whose funds in part originated with the federal government, a person who lied about his address to get a local library card could be a federal felon, a divided 11th Circuit panel in U.S. v. Blankenship (Aug. 26, 2004) overturned the criminal convictions of the principal of a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) under 18 U.S.C. 1001 because the sham contracts are false certified payroll records that were used to obtain payment under a federally-funded state highway project were not statements made to federal agencies. The Eleventh Circuit's analysis, together with the D.C. Circuit's civil False Claims Act decision in U.S. ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp. (see C&M Bullet Point, Sept. 16) represents a significant cutback of federal authority to sanction contractors doing business with federal grantees.

Insights

Client Alert | 6 min read | 07.10.25

Is there a Role Anymore for Supplemental Environmental Projects in Environmental Enforcement Settlements?

Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) are voluntary, environmental or public health projects that parties subject to environmental enforcement proceedings can propose as part of an administrative, civil, or criminal settlement. SEPs are unique and used specifically in environmental enforcement cases in part because (1) many environmental law statutes do not require a showing of harm to prove a violation; thus, redressing harm, outside of equitable relief, is not usually statutorily required; and (2) pollution is a public harm that is hard to redress, both individually and collectively....