United States ex rel. Tucker v. Nayak
Posted on June 21, 2012 in Case Cites
Written by: David B. Honig
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, found that while some of the allegations were plead with sufficient detail, others were not. Rather than finding that the whistleblower had demonstrated sufficient reliability to allow the entire complaint to be filed, the Court allowed only the claims supported with allegations that met the Rule’s “who, what, where, and when” requirements, while not allowing the remainder of the claims to be filed.
David Honig, of Hall, Render, Killian, Heath & Lyman, and Andrew Martone, of Hesse Martone, represented the Defendants represented the Defendant, P.D.L. Nayak, M.D.
For more information, please contact David B. Honig at dhonig@hallrender.com or (317) 977-1447.
RSS Subscribe
Government Enforcement/FCA Task Force
Representative FCA Cases
Categories
attorney's fees
Biographies
Case Analysis
Case Cites
Conditions of Participation
Counterclaims
Criminal Fraud
Damages
Discovery
E&M Coding
Employment
Exclusion
False Certification
FCA
Fees
First to File
Government Intervention
Legal Updates
Litigation Handbook
Materiality
MSPA
Original Source
Pharmacy
Privilege
Public Disclosure Bar
Qui Tam
Regulatory Noncompliance
Release
Retained Overpayments
Reverse False Claims
Rule 12(b)(6)
Rule 9(b)
Safe Harbor
Seal
Settlement
Stark Act
Statute of Limitations
Statutes and Regulations
Uncategorized
Worthless Services