The Eleventh Circuit issued an opinion in one of the largest False Claims Act recoveries in recent years, reinstating the majority of a massive $350 million jury verdict. The decision weighs in on a number of key and emerging FCA issues, including materiality under Escobar and relator standing. The decision is beneficial to relators and the government, but the Eleventh Circuit’s reasoning, especially with regard to Escobar, is less than clear and leaves much open to interpretation. It states that the key difference between two claims is whether the purported fraudulent scheme had a direct and “obvious” impact on the government’s payments.
Regulations, Compliance, & Enforcement
Trending Now
“That is textbook fraud”—Fourth Circuit Upholds Criminal False Claims Act Conviction, Underscoring Overbilling Red Flags for Federal Contractors • Trade Compliance Flash: Trump’s America First Arms Transfer Strategy Prioritizes the Domestic Industrial Base • DOL: Some Federal Contract Workers Set to Receive $13.65 Minimum Wage • Federal Agency Restrictions on Purchasing Products or Services with Certain Chinese Semiconductors: Proposed Federal Acquisition Rule Released • FCA Basics: Liability Theories
How Do You Know When a Term Is Material? It’s “Obvious,” Says the Eleventh Circuit
Stefan Malloch | Shutterstock
Track False Claims Act cases, audit trends, and compliance best practices with our Compliance & Enforcement newsletter, delivering up-to-the-minute intelligence Monday–Saturday — Subscribe here.