1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act Available to Qui Tam Relators Even When the U.S. Does Not Intervene

Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act Available to Qui Tam Relators Even When the U.S. Does Not Intervene

Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.20.13

In U.S. ex rel. Carter v. Halliburton Co. (Mar. 18, 2013), the Fourth Circuit held that (1) dismissals of a qui tam plaintiff's FCA complaint under the first-to-file bar should be without prejudice, thereby allowing a relator to refile her complaint after the original action has been dismissed and is no longer "pending"; and (2) the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (WSLA), which tolls "any statute of limitations applicable to any offense[ ] involving fraud or attempted fraud against the United States" "[w]hen the United States is at war," applies (i) to both civil and criminal fraud against the United States, (ii) even without a formal declaration of war, and (iii) regardless of whether the U.S. intervenes. In a partial dissent, Judge Agee argued that allowing relators to benefit from the WSLA when the government has not intervened provides a "strong financial incentive for relators to allow false claims to build up over time before they filed, thereby increasing their own potential recovery."


Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.20.26

SCOTUS Holds IEEPA Tariffs Unlawful

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a pivotal ruling in Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, negating the President’s ability to impose tariffs under IEEPA. The case stemmed from President Trump’s invocation of IEEPA to levy tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, China, and other countries, citing national emergencies. Challengers argued—and the Court agreed—that IEEPA does not delegate tariff authority to the President. The power to tariff is vested in Congress by the Constitution and cannot be delegated to the President absent express authority from Congress....

View All Insights