Intermountain FCA Round-Up Fall/Winter 2015

avatar
  • LinkedIn

Our (somewhat) semiannual round up of recent decisions in False Claims Act cases throughout the Intermountain West:

  1. In Moore v. University of Kansas, the District of Kansas entertained the argument that the amendments to the anti-retaliation provision of the False Claims Act by the 2009 Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act may have undermined the Tenth Circuit’s jurisprudence on those claims, specifically its rulings in United States ex rel. Ramseyer v. Century Healthcare Corp., 90 F.3d 1514, 1522 (10th Cir. 1996) and McBride v. Peak Wellness Center, Inc., 688 F.3d 698, 704 (10th Cir. 2012).
  2. The Moore court held that a party may bring an FCA retaliation claim for prospective injunctive relief against a state notwithstanding the Eleventh Amendment.
  3. The Utah District Court explained that Plaintiffs bringing retaliation claims under the FCA do not have to satisfy the filing requirements for qui tam suits in Laird v. Spanish Fork Nursing and Rehabilitation Management.
  4. In Laird, the court found that the plaintiff’s allegations that she had been ordered to backdate assessment orders to qualify already provided services for reimbursement from Medicaid/Medicare and told her supervisor that she would not engage in such fraud were sufficient to trigger protection under the FCA’s anti-retaliation provision.