Courts Return to Real Particularity to Meet Rule 9(b)’s “Fraud with Particularity” Requirement

0
The courts appear to be walking back their trend toward loosening False Claims Act (“FCA”) pleading requirements. The FCA is a fraud statute, and lawsuits alleging FCA violations must be pled under Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: Fraud or Mistake; Conditions of Mind. In alleging fraud or mistake,... Continue Reading →

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,


Statistical Evidence and the False Claims Act

0
The False Claims Act[1] is a fraud statute; therefore, False Claims Act complaints must be pled with particularity,[2] identifying “the who, what, when, where, and how of an actual false claim” submitted to the government.[3] Whistleblowers without evidence of specific claims have tried to circumvent the rule with statistics, showing... Continue Reading →

Tags: , , , , ,


U.S. ex rel. Clausen v. Laboratory Corp. of America, Inc.

0
290 F.3d 1301, (11th Cir. 2002). To adequately plead a False Claims Act case under Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b), a whistleblower may not merely plead a scheme to defraud. Rather, they whistleblower must plead and identify actual claims which are false. For more information, please contact David B. Honig at dhonig@hallrender.com or... Continue Reading →

Tags: , , , , , , ,


Do whistleblowers have to plead with particularity for every claim?

0
Pleading a False Claims Act case can be a tricky exercise, and in defending an FCA case, it is important to know just what the rules are for a whistleblower, and how they can fail to meet them. One of the most common mistakes made by whistleblowers is failing to “plead fraud... Continue Reading →

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,


United States ex rel. Lusby v. Rolls-Royce Corp.

0
570 F.3d 849, 844 (7th Cir. 2009). The Court of Appeals ruled that a whistleblower met Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b)’s requirement to plead fraud “with particularity,” even where he did not produce actual invoices submitted to the government, where the contract required submission of invoices and the whistleblower alleged false certification of compliance... Continue Reading →

Tags: , , , , ,


U.S. ex rel. Stewart v. The Louisiana Clinic

0
2002 WL 1066745 (E.D.La. Case No. Civ.A. 99-1767, May 28, 2002). The False Claims Act whistleblower attempted to identify fraudulent schemes with enough detail to meet Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 9(b)’s requirement that all averments of fraud be plead “with particularity.” However, his complaint identified actions taken by “the defendants,” and did... Continue Reading →

Tags: , , , , ,


United States ex rel. Camillo v. Ancilla Systems, Inc.

0
2005 WL 1926559 (S.D.Ill. Case No. 03 CV 0024 DRH, Aug. 8, 2005) Defendant Kenneth Hall Regional Hospital, Inc., moved to dismiss the whistleblower’s amended complaint, as it was not an original defendant. As a result, the government had never reviewed the claims against it and made an intervention decision,... Continue Reading →

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,


United States ex rel. Tucker v. Nayak

0
2008 WL 907432, *2 (S.D.Ill. Case No. 06-CV-662-JPG, April 2, 2008) The FCA whistleblower moved to amend her complaint. The Defendant, Dr. Nayak, objected, arguing that amendment was futile as the amendment still failed to plead with the particularity required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b). The Court, reviewing the proposed amended complaint,... Continue Reading →

Tags: , , , , , ,