• Qui Tam
  • SEC
  • CFTC
  • FCPA
  • Whistleblower Resources
  • FAQS
Subscribe
Donate
No Result
View All Result
Whistleblower Network News
The Truth at Any Cost.
Qui Tam, Compliance and Anti-Corruption News.
SIGN THE PETITION FOR NATIONAL WHISTLEBLOWER DAY IN 2023
Whistleblower Network News
  • Qui Tam
  • SEC
  • CFTC
  • FCPA
  • Whistleblower Resources
  • FAQS
Subscribe
Donate
No Result
View All Result
Whistleblower Network News
No Result
View All Result
Home False Claims-Qui Tam

Court Rules In Favor Of Whistleblower, Closing Key Loophole In False Claims Act

Peter BriccettibyPeter Briccetti
November 20, 2020
in Corporate, False Claims-Qui Tam, News
Reading Time: 4 mins read
FCA Whistleblower
Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInEmail

A D.C. District Court Judge issued an November 6 ruling on a key False Claims Act (FCA) whistleblower case that may have repercussions for years to come. Judge Royce C. Lamberth ruled in the case of United States ex rel. Scollick v. Narula that a controversial “materiality requirement,” used mostly by companies trying to escape allegations of submitting false claims to the government, does not apply to the defendants in the case. 

Because of a Congressionally enacted effort to uplift certain contractors, the government sets aside certain construction contracts for contractors who have special statuses, such as the Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) status, HUBZone status, or Section 8(a) status. Andrew Scollick, a former employee of Centurion Solutions Group and Citibuilders Solutions Group (CSG) and the whistleblower in the case, alleges that several defendants played roles in a fraud scheme that resulted in three separate contractors submitting false claims to the United States under these special government contracting programs when they did not qualify for them. He claims that GSC was actually a shell company with a service-disabled veteran placed at the top of the company only as a figurehead so that the group actually running the company could collect SDVOSB contracts. Optimal Solutions and Technologies, Inc., and two of its directors (collectively OST) are among the defendants accused of running the scheme. 

This case has already pushed boundaries and clarified formerly unclear parts of the FCA. In a previous decision in favor of Scollick, Lamberth ruled that if the insurance companies providing required surety bonds to non-compliant SDVOSB groups had knowledge that the contractors were misrepresenting their SDVOSB status, the insurance companies themselves could be liable. After this key ruling expanded the scope of the case to include the insurance companies, the attention of the court turned towards the question of materiality. 

Support Whistleblower Network News

In the 2016 Supreme Court decision Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, the Court made it harder for a plaintiff to show that a claim was material to the payment of the defendant by the government in order for the defendant to be liable under the FCA. The FCA requires the plaintiff to prove that the claims made by the defendant had “a natural tendency to influence, or [were] capable of influencing” the government to fulfill the contract and actually pay the claim. In Escobar, the Court made it easier for defendants in false claims cases to argue that their original false claim was not “material” to each specific instance of the government paying them, especially if the government had knowledge that some of their requirements for the payment were not met but did nothing to stop payment or restructure the contract. Under this expanded defense, the plaintiff has to prove that the original false claim was material and connected to every payment the government made to the defendant. 

OST has defended themselves in this way, claiming that Scollick had to prove that OST’s misrepresentation of GSC as a SDVOSB was material not only for CSG to be awarded SDVOSB contracts, but also to the government’s decision to pay GSC under those contracts. Lamberth’s November 6 decision disagreed with this assertion. The decision aligns with the “fraudulent inducement” theory that if the contract was obtained through fraud, all further payments based on the contract may be considered fraudulent. In cases where the contract was awarded resulting from fraudulent misrepresentation, Lamberth ruled the materiality defense as insufficient. The court ruled that if a contract was acquired through fraud, each instance of payment will also be fraudulent. In the decision, the court stated that “a fraudulent statement that secures a government contract will always be material to the government’s decision to pay the contractor under the agreement.”

The court denied OST’s motion to dismiss the case and allowed it to continue. This decision lowers the requirements for what the plaintiff must prove in cases of fraudulent inducement. The previous standard requiring that the plaintiff prove a materiality connection between the fraudulently obtained contract and every payment the government made to the defendant put considerably more pressure on the plaintiff and may have allowed companies to escape liability for payments they received fraudulently. 

The FCA is known as one of the most effective tools that the government has to fight corporate fraud and fraudulent contracting of taxpayer money. This decision may encourage more whistleblowers like Scollick to stand up and report fraud when they see that whistleblowers get a fair day in court. The outcome of this case also might send a message to whistleblowers not to be stymied by complicated legal defenses that cleverly navigate around the clear intention behind the FCA.

Read whistleblower law firm Kohn, Kohn & Colapinto’s article here.

Tags: Corporate FraudFalse Claims/Qui Tam
Previous Post

Time to Catch Up: Europe Lags in Key Whistleblower Indicators

Next Post

Robert Ledogar

Peter Briccetti

Peter Briccetti

Peter Briccetti is a contributing editor with Whistleblower Network News. He writes about breaking whistleblower news, and False Claims Act whistleblowers, FCPA whistleblowers, and tax fraud whistleblowers. Peter is a graduate of Hamilton College with a degree in History and an interest in politics and anti-corruption law. At Hamilton, he wrote for the Hamilton College Spectator as an editor and contributor.

Next Post
Robert Ledogar

Robert Ledogar

Please login to join discussion

Receive Daily Alerts

Subscribe to receive daily breaking news and legislative developments sent to your inbox.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Most Popular

Change the Culture, Make National Whistleblower Day Permanent

Tell President Biden to “Finish the Job” for Whistleblowers

Whistleblower Advocates See Parallels to Enron in Silicon Valley Bank Collapse

Whistleblower Jóhannes Stefánsson Plans to Testify at Fishrot Trial in Namibia

WNN Exclusive Interview with Social Security Whistleblowers Sarah Carver and Jennifer Griffith — Part 1

Whistleblower Raised Concerns of Rodents, Spiders in Kitchen of Childcare Facility, Then Fired; OSHA Rules They Were Retaliated Against

Whistleblower Poll

Whistleblower Poll
Whistleblower Poll

Exclusive Marist Poll: Overwhelming Public Support Among Likely Voters For Increased Whistleblower Protections

byGeoff Schweller
October 6, 2020

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

STAY INFORMED.
Subscribe to receive breaking whistleblower updates.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

About Us

  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Donate
  • Careers

Subscribe

  • Daily Mail
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • YouTube Channel

Contribute

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Submission Guidelines
  • Reprint Guidelines

Your Experience

  • Accessibility Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use

Help

  • The Whistleblowers Handbook
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Advertise
Whistleblower Network News

Whistleblower Network News is an independent online newspaper providing our readers with up-to-date information on whistleblowing. Our goal is to be the best source of information on important qui tam, anti-corruption, compliance, and whistleblower law developments. 

Submit an Article

Copyright © 2021, Whistleblower Network News. All Rights Reserved.

This Newspaper/Web Site is made available by the publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this website, you understand that there is no attorney-client relationship between you and the Newspaper/Web Site publisher. The Newspaper/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

SIGN THE PETITION FOR NATIONAL WHISTLEBLOWER DAY IN 2023
No Result
View All Result
  • Exclusives
  • Government
    • False Claims-Qui Tam
    • Federal Employees
    • Intelligence
  • Corporate
    • CFTC & Commodities
    • Dodd-Frank
    • IRS & Tax
    • SEC & Securities
  • Features
  • Legislation
  • International
    • Foreign Corruption
  • Rewards
  • Whistleblower of the Week
  • Environment & Climate
  • Opinion
  • Editorial
  • Employment
    • Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblowers
    • Retaliation
    • OSHA
  • Media
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
    • Webinars
    • National Whistleblower Day
  • Whistleblower Poll
  • Whistleblower Resources
    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • Resources for Locating An Attorney
    • The New Whistleblowers Handbook
  • National Whistleblower Day ’23

Copyright © 2020, Whistleblower Network News. All Rights Reserved.

Become a Whistleblower Network News Subscriber

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Subscribe to WNN

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Subscribe to WNN

Add New Playlist

Go to mobile version