States’ Statutes Of Limitations Apply To Federal FCA Retaliation Claims
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.27.05
Resolving a split among circuits regarding the proper statute of limitations to apply in "retaliation" claims brought by aggrieved whistleblowers against their employers under the federal civil False Claims Act, the Supreme Court in Graham County Soil & Water Conserv. Dist. v. U.S. ex rel. Wilson (June 20, 2005) held that, instead of the familiar six-year limitations period for substantive FCA allegations, the most analogous statute of limitations under state law (typically, state employment or other tort law) applies. The majority reasoned that, otherwise, the limitations period would be left without a starting point and would be inconsistent with the general rule that Congress drafts statutes of limitations to begin when the plaintiff has a “complete and present cause of action.”
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.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 02.20.26
Section 5949 Proposed Rule Puts the FAR Council's Chips on the Table
Client Alert | 5 min read | 02.20.26
Trump Administration Pursues MFN Pricing for Prescription Drugs
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.19.26
Proposed NY Legislation May Mean Potential Criminal Charges for Unlicensed Crypto Firms
