In a recent Legal Intelligencer article, Phila. Attorneys Reach $9M Settlement for Whistleblower Claims the US Declined, Philadelphia-based litigation reporter Aleeza Furman detailed how Kang Haggerty attorneys secured a $9 million settlement with defendants in a False Claims Act qui tam lawsuit over the distribution of illegitimate fentanyl prescriptions. Continue reading ›
Kang Haggerty member Kandis L. Kovalsky will be a presenter for Touhy Subpoena Practice – Getting the Information You Need to Prove (or Disprove) the Case, on behalf of the Qui Tam Section of the Federal Bar Association. The webinar will take place from 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm EDT on May 10, 2023.
The program will provide varied perspectives from government, relator, and defense counsel on Touhy subpoena practice in declined False Claims Act cases. The conversation will cover the process and procedural elements of Touhy subpoenas, negotiations with the Government, and use of that information in litigation.
Joining Kandis on the panel will be moderator Zachary Arbitman, Feldman Shepherd; Paul Kaufman, United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; and Amanda B. Robinson, Morgan Lewis.
Member Edward T. Kang and Associate Ross Wolfe attended the Federal Bar Association Qui Tam Section’s Annual Qui Tam Conference in Washington, DC, from February 16 through February 17. This year’s theme was New Frontiers: Redefining the Landscape of the FCA.
The Qui Tam Section of the Federal Bar Association was started in 2015. It provides education, training, and networking opportunities for attorneys involved with the False Claims Act and other whistleblower statutes. Their award-winning Annual Qui Tam Conference is the section’s premier event. It rallies noteworthy leaders and eminent keynote speakers to foster deep analysis and discussion on contemporary whistleblower-related issues.
A smart and tactical choice of venue can set the stage for victory, and in a False Claims Act case, that choice may make all the difference.
In the November 10, 2022 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang wrote “Circuit Split on Materiality Standard in FCA Cases and Choosing the Right Venue” Continue reading ›
In Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., et al. v. United States ex rel., __, 575 U.S. __ (2015), two questions were presented before the U.S. Supreme Court: first, whether the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (WSLA) suspends the already generous statute of limitation under the False Claims Act (FCA); second whether the FCA’s “first-to-file” rule, which states generally that if more than one whistleblowers file the actions on the same fraud, only the first to file survives and others are dismissed, bars later filed whistleblower actions if the first filed action has been dismissed.
Reversing the Fourth Circuit Court’s decision to extend the WSLA to civil offenses, the Supreme Court unanimously held in that the WSLA only applies to criminal offenses, meaning the WSLA does not suspend the statute of limitation for an individual action brought under the FCA. The Supreme Court further held that the False Claim’s Act’s first-to-file bar applies only while related claims are active. Once the first filed case is settled or dismissed, the bar does not apply.
In 2005, the whistleblower, Carter, filed a qui tam complaint alleging that his former employer fraudulently charged the U.S. government for water purification services inadequately or fraudulently performed during the Iraq War. Nearing trial, the complaint (Carter I) was dismissed under the first-to-file rule based on an earlier filing with similar claims in United States ex rel. Thorpe v. Halliburton Co., No. 05-cv-08924 (C.D. Cal., filed Dec. 23, 2005).
A federal court in Pennsylvania recently ruled that counterclaims against the whistleblower filed by the target of a whistleblower action can survive. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in United States of America ex rel. Lorraine Notorfransesco v. Surgical Monitoring Association, Inc., et al. (Tucker, C.J.) has denied a motion by the whistleblower, Lorraine Notorfransesco, to dismiss counterclaims made by her former employer, Surgical Monitoring Association (“SMA”). While the recent ruling seems to suggest that potential whistleblowers would be dissuaded from “blowing the whistle” for fear of being retaliated, the ruling is not exactly as controversial as it seems.
2013 Proves Great for Whistleblowers
by Edward Kang
Modern day application of the False Claims Act falls into a variety of fields and categories which all merit usage under their respective terms when applicable. One specific claim that seems to be having its usage expanded is a reverse false claim. Unlike typical false claims where a person can incur liability by receiving a payment… Continue reading ›
The 2007 great recession served as a peak moment in longtime calls for improvement to the American financial regulatory system. In response to the outcry for system modification, the Obama Administration pushed for a sweeping large scale upheaval of the current regulatory procedure… Continue reading ›