{"id":105,"date":"2016-06-17T10:32:11","date_gmt":"2016-06-17T14:32:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/?p=105"},"modified":"2016-06-17T10:32:11","modified_gmt":"2016-06-17T14:32:11","slug":"u-s-supreme-court-concludes-that-implied-false-certification-is-allowed-but-limited-fca-liability-is-expanded","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/2016\/06\/17\/u-s-supreme-court-concludes-that-implied-false-certification-is-allowed-but-limited-fca-liability-is-expanded\/","title":{"rendered":"U.S. Supreme Court Concludes That Implied False Certification Is Allowed but Limited; FCA Liability Is Expanded"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A business may now not know whether it committed fraud until the government chimes in. There are thousands of regulations with which businesses need to comply. If you recklessly (or perhaps worse, intentionally) miss one\u2014regardless of which one\u2014and it proves to be material to the government\u2019s decision to pay you, you might be on the hook for fraud. The analysis used to turn on whether the government had labeled that regulation a \u201ccondition of payment.\u201d However, with today\u2019s Supreme Court\u2019s decision in <em>Escobar<\/em>, the analysis has shifted to whether there was an intent to mislead and whether it was material to the government\u2019s decision to pay. In its unanimous decision, the Supreme Court concluded that what matters is not what label the government attaches to a particular requirement, but whether a party knowingly violated a requirement they know to be material to the government\u2019s decision to pay.<\/p>\n<p>To read the full text of this <em>Duane Morris Alert<\/em>, please visit\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.duanemorris.com\/alerts\/supreme_court_concludes_implied_false_certification_allowed_limited_fca_liability_expanded_0616.html\" target=\"_blank\">www.duanemorris.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A business may now not know whether it committed fraud until the government chimes in. There are thousands of regulations with which businesses need to comply. If you recklessly (or perhaps worse, intentionally) miss one\u2014regardless of which one\u2014and it proves to be material to the government\u2019s decision to pay you, you might be on the &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/2016\/06\/17\/u-s-supreme-court-concludes-that-implied-false-certification-is-allowed-but-limited-fca-liability-is-expanded\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;U.S. Supreme Court Concludes That Implied False Certification Is Allowed but Limited; FCA Liability Is Expanded&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[171,170,64,169,168,167],"ppma_author":[211],"class_list":["post-105","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general","tag-false-claims-act","tag-fca","tag-fraud","tag-government-fraud","tag-healthcare-fraud","tag-supreme-court-of-the-united-states"],"authors":[{"term_id":211,"user_id":6,"is_guest":0,"slug":"duanemorris3","display_name":"Duane Morris","avatar_url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/843ff6e7a8fe5fc92109b47a45f34b6cf0ea499e6e788db23456c838b0ae6747?s=96&d=blank&r=g","0":null,"1":"","2":"","3":"","4":"","5":"","6":"","7":"","8":""}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=105"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=105"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=105"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=105"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/governmentcontractslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=105"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}