Arizona Attorney Magazine published an article by John Alan Doran about the False Claims Act (FCA) and how to determine when a claim is “knowingly” false. Doran examined a Supreme Court opinion that held that even if an interpretation of a law is objectively reasonable if the defendant knowingly made a false claim, they can be held liable under the FCA.

Below is an excerpt from the article.

The federal False Claims Act (FCA) is the Government’s primary tool to combat frauds committed against the Government. Among other things, the FCA empowers third parties or whistleblowers to bring suit on the Government’s behalf against individuals or entities who defraud the Government. These individuals are known as “relators.” FCA relators are often employees or ex-employees exposing their employers’ allegedly fraudulent practices through FCA litigation. The FCA establishes per-violation penalties plus potential treble damages awards, meaning that systemic acts of fraud can cost the defendant astronomical amounts. FCA relators are entitled to participate in these damages awards, thereby creating a bounty for would-be FCA whistleblowers.

Read the full article HERE.