The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 President’s Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
    • Media
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 President’s Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
    • Media
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Media
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
      • Summit Sponsors
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Master Class 5.0 Trial Academy 2021
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

Ninth Circuit Overturns 23 Years of Precedent and Opens Door for Whistleblower Suits

Posted on August 19, 2015 by Eleanor Smith

images-11

The Ninth Circuit overturned 23 years of precedent in holding it is now irrelevant whether plaintiff whistleblowers were involved in the public disclosure of their claims to recover an award. In so holding, the Court nullified its own 1992 False Claims Act ruling.

In reversing the district court’s dismissal of consolidated False Claims Act suits brought by whistleblowers against Kinetic Concepts Inc. (KCI), the Ninth Circuit found there are only two requirements for a whistleblower, or “relator,” to be considered an original source who may recover under the FCA:

  • The whistleblower must voluntarily inform the government before they file suit.
  • The whistleblower must have direct and independent knowledge of the allegations.

Public Disclosure Irrelevant

Plaintiffs Steven J. Hartpence and Geraldine Godecke, former KCI employees, filed suit in California seven years ago, accusing the company of submitting reimbursement claims for its VAC Therapy accelerated wound-healing devices to Medicare using a payment modifier code that allowed for automatic payment of the claims, despite knowing the claims were irregular and required individual review.

The Ninth Circuit’s 24-page published opinion states,

“Abrogating our earlier precedent, we conclude that it does not matter whether [a whistleblower] also played a role in the public disclosure of the allegations that are part of his suit. We overrule [the 1992 precedent set in Wang ex rel. U.S. v. FMC Corp.] of a hand-in-the-public-disclosure requirement to the original source exception, because the [disclosure] requirement has no basis in the statutory text.”

The 11-judge Ninth Circuit Panel unanimously disagreed with the district court, which used the Wang precedent the rule that the whistleblowers’ claims were based on publicly disclosed information and that they were not original sources. In determining Wang was wrongly decided, the Ninth Circuit has opened the doors for whistleblowers to establish original source status within its jurisdiction.

See Also: Whistleblower Awarded Nearly $1 Million after Exposing Globe University

Qi Tam Relators

Plaintiffs Hartpence and Godecke experienced multiple obstacles throughout the whistleblower suit, such as a dismissal of allegations and disqualification of their counsel due to the improper use of privileged documents in their pleadings. But Mark I. Lebaton, attorney for Hartpence and Godecke, states he is pleased with the new Ninth Circuit precedent:

“We and our clients are elated . . . by the unanimous decision which overturns 23 years of Ninth Circuit precedent. Both the original source portion of the ruling and the first-to-file portion are very significant. The en banc panel has recognized the critical importance of knowledgeable inside whistleblowers in detecting and reporting fraudulent conduct by government contractors.”

Opens the door for fraud suits

The Ninth Circuit’s ruling that whistleblowers no longer need to have a hand in the public disclosure of their claims removes a decades-long deterrent for qui tam relators and opens the door for more suits alleging fraud on the government. “Qui tam” is an abbreviation for the Latin phrase meaning, “Who a well for the king as for himself sues in this matter.” Qui tam relator (or whistleblower) lawsuits allow individuals to bring actions on behalf of the government, in which relators can receive a share of the recovery as a reward for shedding light on fraudulent activity.

Now that it is irrelevant whether whistleblowers have a hand in the public disclosure of their claims, the two requirements set forth by the Ninth Circuit will not have the same deterrent effect on qui tam claims. Whistleblower suits will continue to grow in numbers as a result of this decision, so government contractors should make sure their respective business practices are well above reproach.

Posted in Blog, Business Law, Class Actions, Employment, Marketing, Trial Practice

Comments are closed.

News Categories

Subscribe to Blog and VFJ via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog, the Voice for Justice and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Read about other Top Jury Verdicts

Toyota Will Pay $180M to Settle Violations of the Clean-Air Act

Toyota Will Pay $180M to Settle Violations of the Clean-Air Act

The U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that the United States has[Read More...]
Boeing's Insitu Will Pay $25M to Settle a Whistleblower Complaint About Used Drone Parts

Boeing's Insitu Will Pay $25M to Settle a Whistleblower Complaint About Used Drone Parts

Bingen, Wash.-based Insitu, a Boeing subsidiary, has agreed to pay $25 million to settle allegations that it used recycl[Read More...]
Deutsche Bank Agrees to Settle Criminal and Civil Charges for $130M

Deutsche Bank Agrees to Settle Criminal and Civil Charges for $130M

DEUTSCHE Bank AG agreed to pay US$130 million to settle criminal and civil charges that it bribed foreign officials and manip[Read More...]
Boeing Pays $2.5B to Settle Charges Tied to the 737 MAX Crashes

Boeing Pays $2.5B to Settle Charges Tied to the 737 MAX Crashes

Boeing has agreed to pay just over $2.5 billion to resolve a federal charge of “criminal misconduct” for how its [Read More...]
Texas Attorney General Seeks $43M in Google Antitrust Lawsuit

Texas Attorney General Seeks $43M in Google Antitrust Lawsuit

The mass exodus of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's top staff over accusations of bribery against their former boss has le[Read More...]

#LegalNews

@@TheNTLtop100

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.