1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |FCA Does Not Authorize In-House Counsel/Relator to Reveal Client Confidences

FCA Does Not Authorize In-House Counsel/Relator to Reveal Client Confidences

Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.18.13

In Fair Lab. Practices Assocs. v. Quest Diagnostics (Oct. 25, 2013), the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a qui tam suit that was brought by a general partnership formed for the purpose of bringing the suit because (1) the partnership included the defendant's former general counsel, and (2) the former general counsel violated his ethical obligations by divulging confidential client information in pursuit of the litigation, notwithstanding that a non-lawyer member of the partnership initiated the suit. While the Second Circuit did not create a bright-line rule barring all in-house lawyers from using client information in FCA cases, it did strike a balance between a lawyer's ethical obligations to the client and the government's competing interest in encouraging "whistleblowers" to report fraud, finding that the disclosure exceeded what was necessary to prevent the client from committing a crime.


Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.16.26

Federal Circuit Holds Challengers to CICA Stay Overrides Need Not Satisfy Four-Factor Injunctive Relief Test

In a significant decision for government contractors, on April 15, 2026, in Life Science Logistics, LLC v. United States, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that bid protesters challenging an agency’s override of an automatic stay of contract performance under the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) need not satisfy the demanding four-factor test traditionally required for preliminary injunctive relief.  In so doing, the Federal Circuit clarified that CICA stay override challenges need only demonstrate that the override decision was arbitrary and capricious—nothing more....

View All Insights