1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Similar State FCA Allegations Yield Mixed Results

Similar State FCA Allegations Yield Mixed Results

Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.03.05

In two California Civil False Claims Act (FCA) cases recently decided by different districts of the California Court of Appeal, California ex rel. Harris v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (Jan. 20, 2005) and California ex rel. Bowen v. Bank of America (Jan. 31, 2005), qui tam relators got mixed results on their novel “reverse false claims”allegations that the defendants failed to report and turn over to the State unclaimed property as required by California law. In Harris, applying case law under the federal FCA, the court upheld liability against an escrow title company and reversed summary judgment in favor of its accountants; but in Bowen, the Court, also applying federal case law, upheld the dismissal of the consolidated complaint against several banks on the ground that the plaintiffs had failed to allege facts that would make the subject property “certain and liquidated,” such that no reverse false claim could arise from the failure to report and turn over the property.

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 08.21.26

FTC Proposes Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing: What Businesses Need to Know

On August 19, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a proposed Enforcement Policy Statement on personalized pricing — the practice of companies using consumers’ personal data to set individualized prices, discounts, coupons, or other incentives. The proposed statement, which is open for public comment for 30 days following publication in the Federal Register, marks a major step up in the FTC’s focus on data-driven pricing strategies and puts businesses across industries on notice that undisclosed or inadequately disclosed personalized pricing will not be tolerated. Importantly, while the proposed statement is not a binding legal requirement and does not create new legal obligations, it serves as an enforcement warning that the FTC is prepared to use its existing enforcement authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act (Section 5) and is also a potential harbinger of rulemaking. Businesses that engage in — or are considering — personalized pricing should carefully assess their disclosure practices and data collection procedures against the standards articulated in this statement....