Government Sanctioned for Failure to Preserve Documents
Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.26.12
In United States ex rel. Baker v. Community Health Sys., Inc, No. 05-279-WJ-ACT (D.N.M. Oct. 3, 2012), the U.S. District Court in New Mexico upheld sanctions against the government for failing to preserve electronically stored information in a False Claims Act case, ordering the government to produce certain privileged materials. This case provides valuable reminders that the government's duty to preserve evidence may arise long before it intervenes and that merely issuing a litigation hold is not in and of itself sufficient to satisfy the duty to preserve, but parties also must take diligent steps to implement and monitor compliance with preservation obligations.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.15.26
GAO Indicates Reasonable Conflict of Interest Investigation Must Include Inquiry of Involved Firm
The U.S. Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recent decision in Viderity Inc.—Costs, B-424422.5, Sept. 1, 2026, offers useful insight into what constitutes a legally sufficient conflict of interest investigation. The decision arose in an unusual procedural posture: Viderity initially protested, alleging that an agency evaluator had a personal conflict of interest. After the agency took corrective action, Viderity filed a cost entitlement claim requesting that GAO direct the agency to reimburse Viderity’s protest costs. In evaluating that claim, GAO assessed whether Viderity’s underlying protest ground was “clearly meritorious.”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 09.15.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.14.26
AI in Life Sciences: Ten Legal Considerations and Risks of AI Use in Drug Discovery and Development
Client Alert | 6 min read | 09.14.26
Mental Health Parity Bulletin Restates Best Practices for Evaluating Compliance
