Tag Archives: Implied Certification Theory

Chris Roux and John Hanover Published in The Construction Lawyer on Implied False Certification Liability

▪ Written by
Alston & Bird partners Chris Roux and John Hanover had their article, “Implied False Certification Liability Under the False Claims Act: How the Materiality Standard Offers Protection after Escobar,” published in the Winter 2018 edition of The Construction Lawyer. The article takes an in-depth look at the viability of implied false certification claims under the False Claims Act by examining their use before and after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Escobar decision, the key elements of the decision, and how varying interpretations of the decision apply to the construction industry. Readers [...]Read more

Circuit Court Signals Potential Impacts of Escobar

▪ Written by and
Lower courts have begun grappling with the implications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar. In U.S. ex rel. Sheet Metal Workers International Association v. Horning Investments, LLC, a union filed a qui tam lawsuit against Horning Investments, LLC. Horning, a roofing company, was acting as a subcontractor for a construction project for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. The union claimed that Horning violated the False Claims Act by failing to pay union workers in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act. Under the Davis-Bacon [...]Read more

The Supreme Court Weighs In on the Implied Certification Theory of False Claims Act Liability

▪ Written by and
The Supreme Court has handed the Department of Justice and qui tam relators a bigger hammer to wield against government contractors with its opinion in Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, confirming the viability of the implied certification theory of False Claims Act (FCA) liability. In this case, the relators filed a qui tam action alleging that a provider of mental-health services in Massachusetts violated the FCA when it submitted Medicaid reimbursement claims that included representations about the services provided, but failed to disclose that the service [...]Read more

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Significant False Claims Act Case

▪ Written by
Our colleagues Jackie Baratian and Jason Popp summarize here the oral argument for Universal Health Services v. United Sates ex rel. Escobar heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, April 19th, laying out the various arguments presented by counsel and addressed by the Justices.  As they note, much of the argument focused on the Restatement of Contracts, as a source of “fraud” in contracting common law, to help draw a distinction between an implied promise and an immaterial unspoken performance detail.  The Justices also took note of the decision in Halper, in which the Supreme Court in [...]Read more

Supreme Court to Rule on the Implied Certification Theory

▪ Written by and
The U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments in a case that will have significant implications for cases brought under the False Claims Act (FCA). In Universal Health Services v. United States ex rel. Escobar, No. 15-7, the Court will hear argument on two important questions. First, whether the “implied certification” theory of legal falsity is viable under the FCA, a question on which the circuit courts of appeal are divided. If the Court concludes the implied certification theory is viable, then the second issue it will consider is whether government contractors’ reimbursement claims [...]Read more