On June 9 the United States Supreme Court dealt a blow to the U.S. government, and those suing on its behalf, in Allison Engine Co. v. United States ex rel. Sanders, 553 U.S. ___ (June 9, 2008), a case under the False Claims Act. The Court rejected an expansive interpretation of the statute that would have extended liability to almost any company in any industry. But the decision was not a complete victory for business. For the first time, the Supreme Court held that the FCA applies to subcontractors on government projects, a group that until now had escaped liability.

The FCA was enacted to combat fraud against the federal government. Until recently, relators — whistleblowers suing on behalf of the government — usually sued under subsection (1) of the statute, which imposes liability on any person who knowingly “presents, or causes to be presented” a false or fraudulent claim to the United States. But in recent years, many relators have attempted to broaden the reach of the act by bringing their claims under subsection (2), which imposes liability on any person who knowingly uses a “false record or statement to get a false or fraudulent claim paid or approved by the Government.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]