Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Supreme Court Issues Major False Claims Act Decision

Client Alert

Supreme Court Rules that Liability under the False Claims Act (FCA) Depends on the BELIEF of Defendant

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday, June 1, 2023 that liability in FCA suits depends on whether defendants believed their claims were false, not whether they had made an "objectively reasonable" interpretation of law or regulation. The decision rejects the recent attempts to shift the scienter element’s knowledge standard in FCA cases, clarifying instead that an assessment of a defendant's subjective beliefs about potential wrongdoing is required. In the opinion, Justice Thomas writes “…what matters for an FCA case is whether the defendant knew the claim was false. Thus, if respondents correctly interpreted the relevant phrase and believed their claims were false, then they could have known their claims were false.”

At oral arguments, the government asked the Court to preserve the relevance of subjective intent standard. The Government argued that following the Seventh Circuit’s precedent of “objectively reasonable” interpretation would undermine enforcement and incentivize individuals to come up with crafty, post-hoc arguments for why a claim it submitted was not false. The Court agreed, and its ruling allows the government to rely on deliberate ignorance or recklessness of the defendant instead of having to prove actual knowledge.

The FCA was passed under the Lincoln administration and underwent significant strengthening through a congressional amendment in 1986. Today, the FCA is one of the government's strongest anti-fraud statutes. It imposes liability on individuals and businesses that defraud and cause financial loss to the federal government. The FCA also provides the potential for rewards for whistleblowers who report such fraudulent activities. Since its amendment in 1986, the Department of Justice has successfully utilized the Act to secure settlements and judgments amounting to over $70 billion, mainly in healthcare and defense contracting cases.

The FCA plays a substantial role in balancing the power between the government and industry. Along with being used to combat health care fraud, the FCA serves as the government’s primary tool to redress false claims involving a multitude of other government operations and functions. In recent years, healthcare fraud has been the leading source of the Department’s FCA settlements and judgments, as the FCA has played a critical role in combatting the opioid epidemic and the growing issues surrounding the Medicare Advantage program. The number of FCA cases has increased over the past several years, and it is evident that governments on both the state and federal levels are becoming more aggressive in their use of the FCA to obtain recoveries.

FCA claims can be a source of concern and complexity for businesses when they find themselves as the subject of either a federal investigation or state investigation. Whenever there is government money at stake, there is a chance for an FCA claim. Since fraud in the healthcare industry can lead to rising healthcare costs, the government is keen on cracking down on such activity.  The unanimous ruling decidedly addresses with the FCA’s knowledge element, overturning the Seventh Circuit’s use of an "objectively reasonable" interpretation of law or regulation, and instead holding that an FCA case hinges on whether the defendant knew the claim was false.

Should you have any questions concerning the CMS Final Rule, please contact BMD President Matt Heinle at maheinle@bmdllc.com, BMD Vice President Amanda Waesch at alwaesch@bmdllc.com, or Healthcare Partner Bryan Meek at bmeek@bmdllc.com.


Ramping Up – A Quick Guide to Pressing COVID-19 Employment Law Issues

As the country continues to grapple with a global pandemic that now seems to be never-ending, businesses everywhere are waking up to realize that the calming of the COVID-19 employment issues over the summer has come to an end. As cases rise exponentially in all 50 states as we head into the winter months, the number of employment issues related to COVID-19 will also increase dramatically. For these reasons, it is important that we return to the employment law basics that were covered this prior spring, while highlighting the many lessons we have learned along the way. As COVID-19 matters and concerns continue to hinder the working environment of every business, it is important that you reference this review to guide you through these tough issues and questions.

Your Workplace Under Biden

This is my favorite recurring post – Predictions of How a New Administration Will Affect Your Workplace. Four years ago, we accurately called the emasculation of the 2016 proposed FLSA Overtime Rules (the salary exemption threshold was set at $35,568 in 2019, rather than $47,476 as proposed), we forecasted a conservative shift of the NLRB and its results (a roll-back of employee rights, social media policy evaluations, and joint employer rules), and we nailed the likelihood of multiple conservative appointments to the United States Supreme Court and its long-term effects (although I completely failed to predict that my ND classmate Amy Coney Barrett would fill the final vacancy during the Trump administration). This time, the L+E Practice of BMD has decided to make it a group effort at predicting what will happen, what probably happen, and what might happen under President Biden. As always, please save this in your important files and pull it out four (or eight) years from now to judge our accuracy.

HHS Provider Relief Funds Reporting Requirements: Important Updates Every Provider Should Know

HHS continues to revise its reporting requirements for the use of the Provider Relief Funds. Providers with more than $10,000 in Provider Relief Fund payments must report on the use of the funds through December 31, 2020. The reporting window will begin on January 15, 2021 and providers must complete reporting obligations for FY 2020 by February 15, 2021 through a portal designed by HHS. However, providers that have unexpended funds as of December 31, 2020, will have an additional 6 months to use the remaining funds through June 30, 2021. These providers must submit a second and final report no later than July 31, 2021.

Should I Apply for Phase 3 Funds? Important Considerations Every Provider Should Know

On October 1, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) announced an additional $20 billion in new funding for providers through a Phase 3 distribution. Importantly, providers that previously received HHS Provider Relief Funds or already received payments of approximately 2% of annual revenue from patient care are eligible to apply. Eligible providers have until November 6, 2020 to apply for these Phase 3 Funds. However, the question from providers continues to be: Should I Apply for Phase 3 Funds?

CISA Ransomware Practices

On October 28, 2020, the United States Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued an alert warning of imminent threats to US hospitals and healthcare providers. The specific threat involves RYUK Ransomware attacks. RYUK is a novel ransomware that goes undetected by commercial anti-virus/malware detection programs. Once deployed, RYUK encrypts all data and disables systems. In short, it cripples all functionality down to phone systems and automated doors. Healthcare providers should alert their employees to remain hyper-vigilant and report any suspicious activity seen in email or on networks. It has been reported healthcare providers in New York, Pennsylvania and Oregon have been targeted in the last 48 hours. If your organization encounters issues, BMD can assist in mobilizing a response team and has contacts with forensic IT firms that are familiar with RYUK. It is advisable to engage professionals with experience dealing with this specific threat.