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
The Evolving Procurement Fraud Landscape: Emerging Risks for Government Contractors • DCAA Annual Report to Congress – Fiscal Year 2025 • Key Trends in Government Contracts Compliance • China Supply Chain Compliance Is Becoming Whack-a-Mole • DOJ Settlements Highlight Continued Customs and Trade Fraud Vigilance
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.