Notable Representations, Key Contacts
Our lawyers – which include leading False Claims Act practitioners, nationally recognized commentators on the False Claims Act, former government officials, a number of leading trial attorneys, and appellate experts – are well-versed in all aspects of FCA litigation and investigations, including lawsuits brought by qui tam relators, lawsuits where the government chose not to intervene, civil and criminal litigation brought by government agencies, and related government and internal investigations. Additionally, we have successfully handled FCA cases through all phases of litigation before federal and state trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.
We have tried or supervised to trial both the prosecution and defense of FCA matters, resolved FCA cases on motion, engineered successful FCA settlements, counseled clients on significant internal investigations into FCA-related issues, and performed substantive due diligence in the context of M&A and other corporate transactions.
Our experience includes the application of all relevant statutory and non-statutory defenses, including the public disclosure bar, the first-to-file rule, the statute of limitations, the tax bar, and the government knowledge defense, among others.
We have obtained significant victories, including a major decision from the U.S. Supreme Court that interpreted the public disclosure bar of the FCA, and a high-profile win before the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court that is one of the first appellate decisions interpreting the New York State FCA.
Finally, we have advised a number of companies on the development of compliance programs, so that they can take steps to avoid or limit FCA risk, and develop the best record possible to defend against any FCA claims that do arise.
Weil is currently representing a major insurance company and a number of its affiliates in a False Claims Act action alleging that they knowingly and improperly avoided their obligation to reimburse Medicare for conditional payments Medicare paid on behalf of Defendants’ insureds, and for which Defendants are primarily responsible pursuant to the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. The Relator alleges that defendants, when settling liability claims with Medicare beneficiary insureds, enter into general releases with those insureds that do not include language for reimbursement to Medicare and that shifted the responsibility to reimburse Medicare from defendants to the insured, thereby failing to ensure that Medicare will be properly reimbursed.
Weil is also currently representing the same client and a number of its affiliates in another False Claims Act action alleging that they knowingly and improperly avoided their obligation to reimburse Medicare for conditional payments under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act. The Relator alleges that defendants routinely lack procedures that would allow them to, among other things, identify Medicare beneficiary status of claimants in liability and no-fault actions, report liability and no-fault settlements, judgments or awards involving Medicare to the Center for Medicaid Services, and repay Medicare for past conditional payments.