Reverse False Claim Requires "Established" Obligation to Pay
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.15.16
On December 13, 2016, the Fifth Circuit, reversing the district court, held in U.S. ex rel. Simoneaux v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co that the 2009 amendments to the FCA did not abrogate its prior precedent holding that reverse false claims liability did not extend to potential or contingent obligations to pay unassessed government fines or penalties. Agreeing with both the defendant and, notably, the United States, the court concluded that, while the 2009 amendments clarified that the amount of the obligation need not be “fixed,” the duty to pay had to be “established” before liability could attach.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 06.16.26
What United States v. Bankman-Fried Means for Health Care Fraud Defense
On the surface, United States v. Bankman-Fried is a case about the collapse of a cryptocurrency exchange. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s recent opinion — affirming Samuel Bankman-Fried’s conviction on seven counts of fraud and conspiracy — carries important lessons that extend well beyond the world of digital assets.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.15.26
Kansas Federal Court Applies “Selective Enforcement” Theory to Reject DTSA Claim
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
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
