1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Defective Pricing & the False Claims Act

Defective Pricing & the False Claims Act

Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.21.19

The enactments of the False Claim Act (FCA) and the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA) were separated by nearly 100 years, yet the two statutes have become kissing cousins, with many defective pricing cases turning into fraud actions. In Defective Pricing & the False Claims Act, published in the April 2019 issue of Thomson Reuters’s Briefing Papers, Crowell & Moring attorneys discuss: (1) the historical factors and practical warning signs linking defective pricing and FCA actions; (2) the burdens and elements of proof in TINA and FCA litigations and how certain elements may overlap and even bolster defenses to both defective pricing and fraud actions; and (3) the procedural elements of TINA and FCA actions—such as stays of proceedings, evidentiary standards, and statutes of limitation—and where these factors may determine the outcomes in both defective pricing and fraud proceedings.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.13.26

Massachusetts Trade Secret Preliminary Injunctions: Prove the Harm, Tailor the Relief

A strong trade secret claim is not a substitute for proof of irreparable harm. In Daikin Applied Americas Inc. v. Russo, No. SJC-13881 (Mass. Oct. 14, 2026), the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that likely success on a misappropriation claim does not create a presumption of irreparable harm. The court grounded its ruling in both the Massachusetts Uniform Trade Secrets Act and the traditional equitable principles the statute incorporates. It required a case-specific showing that the requested relief would prevent harm that a final judgment could not adequately remedy. ...