<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Allison Engine Co. v. US ex. Rel Saunders - Whistleblower Law Blog</title>
<link>http://whistleblower.labovick.com/articles/whistleblower-legal-news/</link>
<description></description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2010</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:37:42 -0500</lastBuildDate>
<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:43:05 -0500</pubDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

<item>
<title>Supreme Court requires Whistleblowers to show there was intent to defraud the government</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>In a recent Supreme Court decision today, in the <a href="http://www.labovick.com/lawyer-attorney-1237341.html">qui tam</a>&nbsp;suit, <a href="http://whistleblower.labovick.com/Supreme Court Allison Opinion(1).pdf">Allison Engine Co. v. US ex. Rel Saunders</a>,&nbsp; Supreme Court Justice Alito writes in his opinion that&nbsp; &quot;it is not enough under &sect;3729(a)(3) for a plaintiff to show that the alleged conspirators agreed upon a fraud scheme that had the effect of causing a private entity to make payments using money obtained from the Government. Instead, it must be shown that they intended &ldquo;to defraud the Government.&rdquo; Where their alleged conduct involved the making of a false statement, it need not be shown that they intended the statement to be presented directly to the Government, but it must be established that they agreed that the statement would have a material effect on the Government&rsquo;s decision to pay the false or fraudulent claim. Pp 8 -10.&quot; 471 F. 3d 610, was vacated and remanded. This was a unanimous&nbsp;decision&nbsp;for the Court.</p>
<p>According to&nbsp;Stephen M. Kohn, the President of the National Whistleblower Center,&nbsp; the Court laid the responsibility for fixing the law directly on Congress: 'Had congress intended' the False Claims Act to 'apply to any one who conspired to defraud' the government 'it would have so provided.&quot;<br />
<br />
Does this give conspirators planning to defraud the government, a&nbsp; &quot;&nbsp;free pass&quot;?&nbsp; Let's hope this is not the case. Maybe this uncertainty will light a fire under Congress to pass the False Claims Correction Act.&nbsp; </p>
<p>Note to Whistleblowers: Do not let this ruling discourage you from bringing <a href="http://www.labovick.com/lawyer-attorney-1237341.html">qui tam</a> cases. This decision is&nbsp;only a minor set back.&nbsp; The rules of the game may have changed a little, however,&nbsp; the strategy to bring those guilty of defrauding the government to justice, has become more interesting. </p>
<p>Click here to read entire Supreme Court Opinion for <a href="http://whistleblower.labovick.com/Supreme Court Allison Opinion.pdf">Allison Engine Co. v. US ex. Rel Saunders</a></p>
<p><br />
&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
<link>http://whistleblower.labovick.com/2008/06/articles/whistleblower-legal-news/supreme-court-requires-whistleblowers-to-show-there-was-intent-to-defraud-the-government/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whistleblower.labovick.com/2008/06/articles/whistleblower-legal-news/supreme-court-requires-whistleblowers-to-show-there-was-intent-to-defraud-the-government/</guid>
<category>Allison Engine Co. v. US ex. Rel Saunders</category><category>Justice Alito</category><category>National Whistleblower Center</category><category>Stephen M. Kohn</category><category>Whistleblower Legal News</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:37:42 -0500</pubDate>
<dc:creator>LaBovick Law</dc:creator>

</item>


</channel>
</rss>