SCOTUS May Resolve Circuit Split on the Specificity Required of False Claims Act Claims: Relief or More FCA Grief for Providers?

7
arfa adam | Shutterstock

Currently, providers have different risks of potential False Claims Act (FCA) liability depending on where they are geographically located due to the difference in the standards required by the U.S. Courts of Appeals regarding the level of specificity when relators (whistleblowers) plead FCA violations. The FCA imposes civil liability on any person requesting government funds or property who “knowingly presents… a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval.” 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(A). A pleading, “alleging fraud or mistake… must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) (emphasis added). And the Circuits of the U.S. Courts of Appeals are split on what information is required in a relator’s FCA complaint under Rule 9(b) to avoid a dismissal of the complaint. The U.S. Supreme Court may resolve the difference in the standards if it grants certiorari in Johnson, et al. v. Bethany Hospice & Palliative Care of Ga., LLC.

Source:

Akerman LLP: SCOTUS May Resolve Circuit Split on the Specificity Required of False Claims Act Claims: Relief or More FCA Grief for Providers?