The March 30, 2016, issue of Bloomberg BNA Heath Care Fraud Report featured the article “Amici Enter Supreme Court Fray About Reach of FCA,” by Squire Patton Boggs lawyersThomas E. Zeno and Rebecca A. Worthington.
A wide variety of groups have staked out positions in advance of the oral argument scheduled in the Supreme Court for April 19 in Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. United States, U.S., No. 15-7, argument scheduled 4/19/16.
The submission of more than 25 amicus briefs indicates the importance of the appeal, which could dramatically change the landscape of False Claims Act (FCA) cases.
The Supreme Court will decide whether “implied certification” can give rise to FCA liability, and, if so, whether a reimbursement claim is legally false if the provider fails to comply with a statute, regulation or contractual provision that does not expressly state it is a condition of payment. This article summarizes the parties’ positions and highlights some of the conflicting arguments offered by the amici.