Podcasts about qui tam

Jay Holland has a national practice focusing on employment law. Along with better known areas such as civil rights, he practices in a niche area involving certain types of whistleblowers in what are known as Qui Tam cases. Qui Tam is not a martial art. Qui Tam allows a private individual to prosecute a case on behalf of the government, with incentives, when that individual(s) is/are blowing the whistle on fraud against the government. If I ever knew this existed, I long forgot it until I spoke to Holland. Jay shares with us the history of these laws and several war stories. I ask questions and pose hypotheticals. Some of which were actually useful to the conversation.In an era where a lot of people talk about fraud prevention and abatement, this is a timely exploration.

We hear about lawsuits and false claims acts regularly, but did you know that many of these begin with someone working from inside the organization? Calling out bad behavior or noncompliance, sometimes again and again without being heard—before deciding to call on a third party for help? You might have seen the recent headlines about New York insurer Independent Health, which agreed in December to pay $100M to settle allegations it had upcoded claims to inflate Medicare Advantage payment. But did you know the basis of the lawsuit was a whistleblower, and 12 years in the making? My guest on Off the Record knows this very well. Mary Inman is a Partner at Whistleblower Partners LLP, and Head of International Whistleblower Practice for the firm. She also served as legal counsel in this very case. I continue my “law and coding” start to 2025 with a fascinating guest and topic. On this show we discuss: Who/what is a whistleblower, and the concept of qui tam The mechanics/process of a whistleblower engaging a lawfirm: Are they working for their employer throughout reporting, discovery? Is gathering evidence to support their case without employer knowledge illegal? What happens to a whistleblower who wins—or loses? How much can they stand to make, and is their career over? New DOJ whistleblower project to encourage additional reporting What some whistleblowers get wrong/false report or misunderstand What hospitals/healthcare organizations can do to lessen the risk Mary's Off the Record Spotify playlist selection (I was disappointed it was not Judas Priest's Breaking the Law)

In this episode, Jason Crawford, Agustin Orozco, and Will Tucker discuss U.S. ex. rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates LLC, the recent decision in which a court found the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act to be unconstitutional. The hosts analyze the court's reasoning and consider its potential impact on FCA cases.   "Let's Talk FCA" is Crowell & Moring's podcast covering the latest developments with the False Claims Act.  

Two government contractors agree to pay a total of $4.3 million to settle allegations that they violated the False Claims Act and forced the Army to overpay for IT hardware. The Justice Department says Dell Technologies and Iron Bow will each pay more than $2 million to resolve a Qui Tam lawsuit. DoJ says Dell and Iron Bow allegedly conspired to collude on solicitations under the Army's AMDC-3 contract. Justice says from 2020 to 2024 Dell operated a deal registration program, whereby it gave advantageous pricing to Iron Bow to sell certain Dell computer hardware products and then also submitted their own direct bids on the same solicitations that were more costly. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Two government contractors agree to pay a total of $4.3 million to settle allegations that they violated the False Claims Act and forced the Army to overpay for IT hardware. The Justice Department says Dell Technologies and Iron Bow will each pay more than $2 million to resolve a Qui Tam lawsuit. DoJ says Dell and Iron Bow allegedly conspired to collude on solicitations under the Army's AMDC-3 contract. Justice says from 2020 to 2024 Dell operated a deal registration program, whereby it gave advantageous pricing to Iron Bow to sell certain Dell computer hardware products and then also submitted their own direct bids on the same solicitations that were more costly. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Summary Eric Rubenstein and Ron Chapman join The Compliance Guy to discuss the implications of a recent dismissal of a False Claims Act case based on the appointment clause. The guys explore the historical context of key tam cases, the role of relators, and the complexities surrounding the appointment clause. The conversation delves into the differences between dismissals with and without prejudice, the potential for Supreme Court involvement, and the impact of venue shopping on key tam cases. The episode concludes with a discussion on judicial appointments and their political implications. Takeaways Qui Tams are a significant part of healthcare fraud enforcement. The appointment clause raises questions about the authority of relators. Dismissals with prejudice are nearly final and limit future actions. The Supreme Court may be interested in conflicting rulings on key tam cases. Venue shopping can dilute the strength of a case. Judges may make decisions that align with their career interests. The appointment of special counsels has constitutional implications. Relators can receive a larger share if the government does not intervene. Resource limitations often lead to the government declining key tam cases. Judicial decisions can reflect broader political agendas. 00:00 Introduction to Key Tam Cases and the Appointment Clause 07:03 Exploring the Appointment Clause and Its Implications 14:03 Dismissal with Prejudice vs. Without Prejudice 16:19 The Future of Key Tam Cases in the Supreme Court 24:13 The Impact of Venue Shopping on Key Tam Cases 30:29 Judicial Appointments and Political Implications

Earning your RHIA (Registered Health Information Administrator) is a huge accomplishment, and for some marks the end of a four-year academic journey and an entry into HIM. For Richelle Marting, it was only the beginning. In pursuit of her RHIA, which she eventually earned, my guest on today's episode took a class on the legal aspects of HIM. That course planted the seed for a career in law—and eventually led her to start her own law firm. All while raising two twin girls. I don't know how she managed all this, but that's why I got Richelle on Off the Record. On this show we discuss: Richelle's story from RHIA to JD. How difficult was the bar exam? Becoming an entrepreneur and starting her own law firm Most frequent type of healthcare cases: Clinical validation audits and DRG validation The coding guidelines she sees most frequently ignored or twisted to the payer's benefit, and other shady tactics What do healthcare organizations make too big a deal out of—and what are they not worried about enough? Qui Tam and the recent spate of cases initiated by organizational whistleblowers, in particular Medicare Advantage organizations Managed care contracting: Legal issues around contract negotiation, how claims get paid, timely filing, and payment policies. How quickly must plans respond to appeals, and should you put a diagnosis definition in a payer contract? What advice would she give to someone who is in HIM and considering a career in law—what does she know now that she wishes she knew then?

Suspicion of Fraud Cannot Support Qui Tam Action Post 4770 Richard Campfield, suing for the State of California, appealed the trial court sustained the demurrer of defendants Safelite Group, Inc. and its subsidiaries, Safelite Solutions LLC and Safelite Fulfillment, Inc. (collectively, Safelite) without leave to amend. Campfield contends he adequately alleged a cause of action under the Insurance Fraud Prevention Act (Ins. Code, § 1871 et seq.) (IFPA) within the statute of limitations. In State Of California, ex rel. Richard Campfield v. Safelite Group, Inc., et al., A168101, California Court of Appeals, First District, Fourth Division (March 29, 2024) explained the requirements to plead a Qui Tam action under the IFPA. Campfield owns a windshield repair company that licenses and sells products for repairing vehicle windshield cracks. Safelite is the nation's largest retailer of vehicle glass repair and replacement services. Safelite also serves as the third party administrator for over 175 insurance and fleet companies, including 23 of the top 30 insurers in California and the country, for processing and adjusting policyholders' vehicle glass damage claims, and it has direct electronic access to over 20 insurance company databases. In 2015, Campfield sued Safelite in federal district court in Ohio, alleging Safelite's continued reliance on its six-inch rule violated the Lanham Act's (15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq.) Safelite admitted in responses to interrogatories in the Ohio action that it has never conducted studies on the safety or viability of repair of cracks longer than six inches. Campfield filed under seal the complaint in the present action against Safelite, alleging a single qui tam cause of action for violation of the Insurance Frauds Prevention Act (IFPA). The Insurance Commissioner and the San Francisco County District Attorney declined to intervene, so in September 2022 the trial court unsealed the complaint. Safelite demurred, arguing, among other things, that the complaint failed to allege facts constituting a cause of action under the IFPA. Campfield failed to plead his claim with sufficient particularity, and the statute of limitations barred the complaint. After briefing and a hearing, the trial court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend based on the statute of limitations and noted that Safelite had raised "substantial arguments" that the complaint had not stated a cognizable claim and that the action was barred by the IFPA's public disclosure bar. The trial court then dismissed the action. The IFPA was enacted to prevent automobile and workers' compensation insurance fraud in order to, among other things, significantly reduce the incidence of severity and automobile insurance claim payments and therefore produce a commensurate reduction in automobile insurance premiums. The sole cause of action in the complaint is based on Insurance Code section 1871.7, subdivision (b), which allows for the imposition of civil penalties and other remedies against anyone who violates Insurance Code section 1871.7 or Penal Code sections 549, 550, or 551. Campfield alleges Safelite violated Penal Code section 550, subdivision (b)(1) and (2). As in any action sounding in fraud, an IFPA action must be pleaded with particularity. To effectively state his IFPA cause of action, Campfield must allege facts showing that Safelite presented, or caused to be presented, a false statement as part of, or in support of or opposition to, a claim for payment or other benefit pursuant to an insurance policy or prepared or made a false statement intended to be presented to any insurer or any insurance claimant in connection with, or in support of or opposition to, any claim or payment or other benefit pursuant to an insurance policy. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barry-zalma/support

Brady's expertise is vital in navigating the legal complexities and aiding federal investigations that aim to reclaim misappropriated funds, hold those responsible accountable, and uphold the integrity of federal programs. Brady & Associates City: Leawood Address: 2118 W 120th Street Website https://mbradylaw.com Phone +1-913-269-6581 Email brady@mbradylaw.com

Anita Mazumdar Chambers is a principal at The Employment Law Group® law firm, where she primarily focuses on matters of discrimination and retaliation. She has extensive experience in conducting corporate investigations to identify and resolve issues before needing to resort to legal action. Ms. Chambers also works in whistleblower protection, severance negotiations, and employee counseling. Learn More: https://www.employmentlawgroup.com/our-team/attorneys-staff/attorneys/anita-mazumdar-chambers/

Welcome to the award-winning FCPA Compliance Report, the longest running podcast in compliance. In this episode, Tom Fox welcomes Adam Pollock, co-founder of PollockCohen and Qui Tam/FCA expert.   Adam Pollock is an experienced lawyer with a unique blend of expertise in computer science and law. Having studied computer science at the University of Michigan before transitioning into law at the University of Pennsylvania, Pollock has spent over 15 years in the legal field, specializing in white-collar defense, Qui Tam cases, False Claims Act cases, whistleblower suits and public advocacy. His law firm's impactful public advocacy cases is rooted in a mission-driven approach, focusing on cases that serve a greater public good. He cites examples such as challenging the government over the regulation of menthol cigarettes, which disproportionately affect the African American community, and fighting for the rights of New York City retirees. Pollock's work is driven by a desire to create positive change and make a difference. Join Tom Fox and Adam Pollock as they delve deeper into these topics on this episode of the FCPA Compliance Report podcast.  Key Highlights ·      How far back Qui Tam case go in history ·      The intersection of Qui Tam, FCA and whistleblower cases ·      Mission Driven Litigation ·      Private Attorney Generals? ·      The FCA at the Supreme Court Resources Adam Pollock on LinkedIn PollockCohenLLP Tom Fox Instagram Facebook YouTube Twitter LinkedIn Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Man Bites Dog Story = Allstate May Sue on Behalf of State for Insurance Fraud Qui Tam Actions May Proceed to Trial https://zalma.com/blog --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barry-zalma/support

ZIFL - 6-15-2023 - Volume 27, Issue 12 The Source For Insurance Fraud Professionals This, the Twelfth issue of the 27th year of publication Zalma's Insurance Fraud Letter provides multiple articles on how to deal with insurance fraud in the United States. The issue begins with: Restitution Order Can't Be Discharged in Bankruptcy After Frayba Tipton and William Tipton pled guilty to committing insurance fraud, they were ordered to pay victim restitution to Nationwide Insurance Company of America (Nationwide). The trial court granted Nationwide's petition and entered civil judgments against the defendants. In Nationwide Insurance Company Of America v. Frayba Tipton et al., C095606, California Court of Appeals. See the full issue at http://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ZIFL-06-15-2023.pdf More McClenny Moseley & Associates Issues This is ZIFL's eighth installment of the saga of McClenny, Moseley & Associates and its problems with the federal courts in the State of Louisiana and what appears to be an effort to profit from what some Magistrate and District judges indicate may be criminal conduct. See the full issue at http://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ZIFL-06-15-2023.pdf Another Insurer Bites the Dust Friday Health Plans of Nevada faces the Nevada District Court to place it under regulatory supervision. See the full issue at http://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ZIFL-06-15-2023.pdf Bad News from The Public A new survey shows it's, like, totally cool to exaggerate damages on an insurance claim or, like, totally awesome to say you hurt yourself at work when you didn't. See the full issue at http://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ZIFL-06-15-2023.pdf Health Insurance Fraud Convictions Fifteen Year Sentence in $134 Million COVID-19 Health Care Fraud and Money Laundering Scheme Billy Joe Taylor, age 44, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit health care fraud and money laundering on October 27, 2022. According to court documents, Taylor and his co-conspirators submitted more than $134 million in false and fraudulent claims to Medicare in connection with diagnostic laboratory testing, including urine drug testing and tests for respiratory illnesses during the COVID-19 pandemic. See the full issue and dozens more convictions at http://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ZIFL-06-15-2023.pdf Florida Judge Slams SFR Contractor for Misrepresentation, Fraud in Tower Hill Case SFR Services, a Florida restoration firm made famous by its volume of claims litigation and its charges that United Property & Casualty Insurance Co. had instructed desk adjusters to alter their estimates, now finds itself in some legal trouble of its own. See the full issue at http://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ZIFL-06-15-2023.pdf Other Insurance Fraud Convictions Man Sentenced to Prison for Staged Arson and Insurance Fraud Denis Vladmirovich Molla falsely reported that his camper had been intentionally set on fire the 30-year-old Minnesota resident has been handed a 30-month prison sentence, followed by one year of supervised release, for filing fraudulent insurance claims related to a staged arson incident. See the full issue and more convictions at http://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ZIFL-06-15-2023.pdf The Baseball Card Scam This is a Fictionalized True Crime Story of Insurance Fraud from my experience as an Insurance Fraud Expert and is provided to explain why Insurance Fraud is a “Heads I Win, Tails You Lose” situation for Insurers. The story is true, only the names and places were changed to protect the guilty. Qui Tam and Insurance Fraud The qui tam portion of the California Insurance Frauds Prevention Act, like that in many other states, has a qui tam provision. (c) 2023 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barry-zalma/support

This is a  SIE Podcast Interview with Whistleblower Attorney Mark Pugsley This is an interview with Whistleblower Attorney Mark Pugsley while this is not information that is required for the Series 7 Exam I think you will be a more knowledgeable advisor if you are aware of the information contained in this interview. Mark Pugsley is quite famous for his part in bringing down Milton Trevor of Nikola corporation.  He was featured prominently in the podcast BAD BETS This is information about Mark Pugsley from his website "Mark Pugsley has been handling securities disputes, financial fraud and whistleblower cases for 28 years. His whistleblower practice includes preparing and filing whistleblower tips with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), he also handles False Claims Act or “Qui Tam” lawsuits, FINRA arbitrations and other types of investment disputes. Mark is based in our Utah office, the state which boasts the largest number of Ponzi schemes per capita in the country. He has been recognized by Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers, Benchmark Plaintiffs, and Martindale Hubbell as one of the top securities lawyers in the country. He is licensed to practice law in Utah and California. Mark represents whistleblowers in a number of high-profile ongoing cases, including the whistleblowers in the Washakie Renewable Energy scam in which executives pleaded guilty to criminal charges in a $1 billion biodiesel tax fraud scheme.  He also represents the whistleblowers in the Nikola Motors case who uncovered widespread fraud by the CEO, Trevor Milton.  The whistleblower report to the SEC in the Nikola case led to a $125 million settlement by the company with the SEC, and Mr. Milton was charged civilly and criminally with securities fraud, among other charges. Another of his whistleblower clients uncovered an ongoing $200 million Ponzi scheme that led to civil and criminal actions by the DOJ, SEC and State regulators.  These cases are ongoing. Significant recoveries for his whistleblower, investment fraud and FINRA Arbitration clients include the following: Representation of two whistleblowers in an SEC whistleblower case that was approved for an award in April of 2021. His clients were awarded 30% of the $9,384,253 in ordered fines and penalties – the maximum award possible. Represented the Declarant in a whistleblower case filed against Vivint Smart Home Inc.. On January 6, 2021 the Justice Department announced that Vivint had agreed to pay the United States $3.2 million to resolve the case. His client will receive a significant reward. Represented a client in an $11 million CFTC whistleblower case that was approved for an award in January of 2020. His client will receive a significant portion of all restitution and civil penalties collected by the CFTC. Representation of three clients in a 5-day trial in Utah State Court where his clients were awarded compensatory damages in excess of $3 million, $2 million in punitive damages, and attorney's fees. Represented a bankruptcy trustee and trustee of a private actions trust pursuing the claims of over 400 victims of a Ponzi scheme against a national life insurance company for securities fraud and the negligent employment of the agents who perpetrated the scheme for over a decade. The parties reached an 8-figure settlement in 2018. Represented 15 clients in a FINRA arbitration case alleging more than $6 million in out of pocket damages involving a rogue broker from a national brokerage firm. The firm settled the case shortly before the arbitration hearing in August of 2018 for a confidential amount. Represented 28 clients in a case alleging more than $10 million in out of pocket damages involving a broker who was employed by a national brokerage firm. The case was settled for a confidential sum that resulted in substantial recovery of his clients' losses.

son23 Securities Act of 1933 Quiz This is a  SIE Podcast Interview with Whistleblower Attorney Mark Pugsley This is and interview with Whistleblower Attorney Mark Pugsley while this is not information that is required for the SIE Exam I think you will be a more knowledgeable advisor if you are aware of the information contained in this interview. Mark Pugsley is quite famous for his part in bringing down Milton Trevor of Nikola corporation.  He was featured prominently in the podcast BAD BETS This is information about Mark Pugsley from his website "Mark Pugsley has been handling securities disputes, financial fraud and whistleblower cases for 28 years. His whistleblower practice includes preparing and filing whistleblower tips with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), he also handles False Claims Act or “Qui Tam” lawsuits, FINRA arbitrations and other types of investment disputes. Mark is based in our Utah office, the state which boasts the largest number of Ponzi schemes per capita in the country. He has been recognized by Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers, Benchmark Plaintiffs, and Martindale Hubbell as one of the top securities lawyers in the country. He is licensed to practice law in Utah and California. Mark represents whistleblowers in a number of high-profile ongoing cases, including the whistleblowers in the Washakie Renewable Energy scam in which executives pleaded guilty to criminal charges in a $1 billion biodiesel tax fraud scheme.  He also represents the whistleblowers in the Nikola Motors case who uncovered widespread fraud by the CEO, Trevor Milton.  The whistleblower report to the SEC in the Nikola case led to a $125 million settlement by the company with the SEC, and Mr. Milton was charged civilly and criminally with securities fraud, among other charges. Another of his whistleblower clients uncovered an ongoing $200 million Ponzi scheme that led to civil and criminal actions by the DOJ, SEC and State regulators.  These cases are ongoing. Significant recoveries for his whistleblower, investment fraud and FINRA Arbitration clients include the following: Representation of two whistleblowers in an SEC whistleblower case that was approved for an award in April of 2021. His clients were awarded 30% of the $9,384,253 in ordered fines and penalties – the maximum award possible. Represented the Declarant in a whistleblower case filed against Vivint Smart Home Inc.. On January 6, 2021 the Justice Department announced that Vivint had agreed to pay the United States $3.2 million to resolve the case. His client will receive a significant reward. Represented a client in an $11 million CFTC whistleblower case that was approved for an award in January of 2020. His client will receive a significant portion of all restitution and civil penalties collected by the CFTC. Representation of three clients in a 5-day trial in Utah State Court where his clients were awarded compensatory damages in excess of $3 million, $2 million in punitive damages, and attorney's fees. Represented a bankruptcy trustee and trustee of a private actions trust pursuing the claims of over 400 victims of a Ponzi scheme against a national life insurance company for securities fraud and the negligent employment of the agents who perpetrated the scheme for over a decade. The parties reached an 8-figure settlement in 2018. Represented 15 clients in a FINRA arbitration case alleging more than $6 million in out of pocket damages involving a rogue broker from a national brokerage firm. The firm settled the case shortly before the arbitration hearing in August of 2018 for a confidential amount. Represented 28 clients in a case alleging more than $10 million in out of pocket damages involving a broker who was employed by a national brokerage firm. The case was settled for a confidential sum that resulted in substantial recovery...

Jury trials under the False Claims Act (FCA) can produce very wild outcomes. In this episode, Captain Integrity Bob Wade breaks down what went down in the recent Eli Lilly/Astellas Pharma case. Hear why jury trials under the FCA are extremely rare, there are large jury verdicts, an effective compliance program can reduce or eliminate the risk of going to court, how big a return the government can receive, and how a mistake could be considered fraud. Learn more at CaptainIntegrity.com

In this quick 15 minute episode Sean discusses the 2022 FCA increases for penalties and discusses the False Claims act and qui tam lawsuits.

Meet Mr. Silberman JD from the BENESCH law firm! We talk about the New Hampshire ruling and Nurse Anesthesiologist, Qui Tam lawsuits and anti-trust, The risk of medicare fraud with medical direction and TEFRA, if Extubation is part of emergence as it related to TEFRA based on the Donegan v. Anesthesia Associates of Kansas City, PC, Liability of surgeons with CRNAs in the ACT or independently and MUCH more! A little about Mark:Mark is an experienced trial lawyer, health care attorney and litigator. His practice focuses on helping health care professionals and businesses navigate the complex and changing landscape of health care with an emphasis on achieving governmental and regulatory compliance.Mark concentrates on managing internal and external health care investigations, False Claims Act cases, white collar criminal defense, all forms of health care litigation, and all aspects of the Illinois Certificate of Need program.Mark handles audit, compliance, investigations and enforcement actions involving HHS-OIG, the Medicare/Medicaid programs, the Illinois Department of Public Health, and Illinois Health Facilities and Services Review Board (Certificate of Need). He advises clients regarding managing and avoiding allegations of health care fraud and health care-related criminal conduct, addressing concerns related to the Anti-Kickback Statute, and pharmacy and pharmaceutical related litigation. He provides counsel and litigation services for physicians, facilities and pharmacies engaged with any federal agency, along with handling Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement issues, False Claims Act/Qui Tam defense, and various health care transactional matters. Mark also served as the outside General Counsel to the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists.More about Mark can be found hereStories and Strategies for Public RelationsCommunication is in every facet of our daily business.Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify

David J. Fish, Founding Partner - Fish Potter Bolaños, P.C. David has served as lead counsel in hundreds of cases and disputes, has helped to recover tens of millions of dollars for his clients, and has tried a number of substantial cases to verdict. He has represented a broad array of clients ranging from large publicly traded companies to janitors and they are all important to him and his firm. Learn More: https://www.fishlawfirm.com/

It takes two to tango in the Stark Law world. In this episode, Captain Integrity Bob Wade welcomes Marlan Wilbanks, Esq. to chat physician liability and qui tam cases under the Stark Law and Anti-Kickback Statute. Hear why the Fair Market Value (FMV) train runs both ways, you should be very, very wary of how you handle wRVU calculations in your hospital, free employees aren't always free, why the government is historically so focused on the DHS entities over the physicians, and the formula attorneys like Marlan Wilbanks use when assessing potential qui tam cases. Learn more at CaptainIntegrity.com

Nearly 300,000 United States service members and veterans are suing technology and manufacturing giant 3M over claims that their supply of military earplugs caused soldiers to suffer hearing loss, tinnitus, and other hearing difficulties. The dual-ended Combat Arms Earplugs (CAEv2) were standard issue equipment for US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan for over 10 years.In this episode of Law, disrupted, host John Quinn and his guests, Matt Hosen and Bryan Alystock, discuss how this defective earplug litigation started and evolved into the largest consolidated mass tort litigation in history.To open the episode, Matt Hosen shares how, as a second year Quinn Emanuel associate, he found, buried in a large document production in an antitrust case in which the firm represented a company called Moldex-Metric, an internal 3M document which became known as “The Flange Report.” He explains that the report by a scientist at 3M revealed that the earplugs that 3M had been selling to the U.S. military for over 15 years were defective.Matt goes on to describe how Hal Barza, a former Quinn Emanuel partner, used the Flange Report in depositions of 3M laboratory employees to great effect; leading not only to the resolution of the antitrust case, but also the commencement of a whistleblower False Claims Act (Qui Tam) case brought against 3M on behalf of the U.S. government. In connection with this Qui Tam lawsuit, the Flange Report was brought to the government's attention, leading to the United States Department of Justice's intervention in the case. 3M entered into a settlement with the U.S. government in 2018 agreeing to pay $9.1 million to resolve allegations it knowingly sold the earplugs to the U.S. military without disclosing the CAEv2 defects. The DOJ issued a public press release in July 2018 announcing the Qui Tam settlement.Bryan Aylstock, managing and founding partner of Aylstock, Witkin, Kreis & Overholtz, based in Pensacola, Florida, then joins the conversation to explain how this DOJ press release led to the plaintiffs' mass tort bar filing cases all over the United States on behalf of U.S. service members alleging product defect, failure to warn and fraud claims. These cases were later consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in Pensacola before Chief District Court Judge Casey Rodgers.Judge Rodgers appointed the Alystock firm to lead a Plaintiff Leadership Committee consisting of over three dozen law firms, including Quinn Emanuel. Judge Rodgers oversaw all aspects of discovery in the MDL, and with input from plaintiffs' and defendants' counsel, selected individual service members to serve as bellwether plaintiffs. Bellwether trials began in April, 2021.Plaintiff service members have achieved victory in 9 of the 15 bellwether trials to date, receiving over $222 million in damages. In the most recent bellwether trial, a Gainesville, Florida jury found in favor of the army veteran on all counts and awarded $2.2 million in compensatory damages. If the average awards in these bellwether cases, including the defense verdicts, are applied across the nearly 300,000 service member lawsuits currently pending, 3M's total exposure would be over $1 trillion.With the bellwether process almost concluded, the guests explain how hundreds of individual lawsuits are now completing discovery, prior to being remanded to federal judges across the country for trial.Created & produced by Podcast PartnersSign up to receive email updates when a new episode drops at: www.law-disrupted.fmMusic by Alexander Rossi Producer www.alexishyde.com 

Michael Macomber is a partner and CEO of Tully Rinckey PLLC, a national law firm that specializes in Federal Employment Law, Military Law and Security Clearance representation. In addition to being a Partner and CEO at Tully Rinckey PLLC, Michael is the Section Chair of the firm's New York State Employment Group. He focuses his practice on federal and private sector employment law claims, including claims involving the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), New York Labor Law, New York Executive Law and Qui Tam claims. In his federal employment practice, Michael has represented employees before the United States Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit, MSPB, EEOC, NLRB, OSC, and various OIGs https://www.tullylegal.com/ --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/ferah-ozbek/message

Charlie Wysong is a partner with Hughes Socol Piers Resnick & Dym, Ltd. He counsels and represents clients on a wide range of legal issues, with a focus on civil rights, labor and employment litigation, whistleblower and qui tam claims, education law, and complex business litigation. He actively litigates in state and federal court, including appeals before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and Illinois Appellate Court. He also represents clients before administrative agencies such as the Illinois State Board of Education, Illinois Department of Human Rights, and National Labor Relations Board. Learn more: hsplegal.com

A Video Explaining An SIU Profit Center The False Claims Act, also known as the “Lincoln Law,” dates back to the Civil War. President Lincoln signed the act into law in 1863 because war profiteers were selling the Union Army shoddy supplies at inflated prices. The original law included qui tam provisions that allowed a private person (plaintiff) to sue those who defrauded the federal government. If the suit was successful the plaintiff would receive 50% of any recovery from the defendant. “Qui tam” is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase “qui tam pro domino rege quam pro si ipso in hac parte sequitur” meaning “Who sues on behalf of the King as well as for himself.” There are a number of pronunciations of the Latin abbreviation qui tam. The simplest is key tam (rhymes with “ham.”) Black's Law Dictionary suggests kweye (rhymes with “eye”) tam. The False Claims Act makes it unlawful to knowingly (1) present or cause to be presented to the United States a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval, 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1) (2006); (2) make or use a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, § 3729(a)(1)(B); or (3) use a false record or statement to conceal or decrease an obligation to pay money to the United States, § 3729(a)(7) (2006). Under the Act, private individuals ..., referred to as “relators,” may file civil actions known as qui tam actions on behalf of the United States to recover money that the government paid as a result of conduct forbidden under the Act. Glaser v. Wound Care Consultants, Inc., 570 F.3d 907, 912 (7th Cir. 2009). As an incentive to bring suit, a prevailing relator may collect a substantial percentage of any funds recovered for the benefit of the government. To establish civil liability under the False Claims Act, a relator generally must prove (1) that the defendant made a statement in order to receive money from the government; (2) that the statement was false; and (3) that the defendant knew the statement was false. E.g., United States Ex Rel. Gross v. Aids Research Alliance–Chicago, 415 F.3d 601, 604 (7th Cir. 2005); USA and the State of Wisconsin v ACACIA Mental Health Clinic, USCA, 2016 WL 4555648 (2016). © 2021 – Barry Zalma Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims handling, insurance bad faith and insurance fraud almost equally for insurers and policyholders. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma/support

Attention federal contractors, the Justice Department has put you on notice. That newly formed Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative means more aggressive pursuit of cybersecurity related fraud by government contractors and grant recipients. They'll use the False Claims Act or the Qui Tam whistleblower incentive provision of the law. Federal News Network's Jason Miller joins me with what vendors need to know.

Explaining the False Claims Act and How Insurers Can Take Advantage of it to Deter Fraud https://zalma.com/blog The False Claims Act, also known as the “Lincoln Law,” dates back to the Civil War. President Lincoln signed the act into law in 1863 because war profiteers were selling the Union Army shoddy supplies at inflated prices. The original law included qui tam [“Qui tam” is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase “qui tam pro domino rege quam pro si ipso in hac parte sequitur” meaning “Who sues on behalf of the King as well as for himself.” There are a number of pronunciations of the Latin abbreviation qui tam. The simplest is key tam (rhymes with “ham.”) Black's Law Dictionary suggests kweye (rhymes with “eye”) tam.provisions that allowed a private person (plaintiff) to sue those who defrauded the federal government. If the suit was successful the plaintiff would receive 50% of any recovery from the defendant.] The qui tam provisions were weakened greatly as a result of congressional amendments in 1943, and qui tam legislation became virtually nonexistent. However, in 1986, Sen. Charles Grassley, R–Iowa, and Rep. Howard Berman, D Calif., joined forces to amend the law and strengthen the incentives for citizens to uncover and fight fraud as qui tam relators. (Relators are the private plaintiffs under the False Claims Act). The 1986 False Claims Act amendments received widespread bi-partisan support, and were signed into law by President Reagan. Since the revitalization, the qui tam provisions have increasingly been used. If the government does intervene, it assumes primary responsibility for the prosecution of the case, and is not bound by any act of the relator. 31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(1). The relator remains as a party to the action, however, subject to certain limitations set forth in the Act. Id. Specifically, the government may dismiss the action notwithstanding the objections of the relator, provided, however, that “the person has been notified by the Government of the filing of the motion and the court has provided the person with an opportunity for a hearing on the motion.” [31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(2)(A).; U.S. ex rel. Atkins v. EEOC, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21268.] Since the qui tam provisions were added to the Act in 1986, the US Department of Justice calculates that the government has recovered more than $1.09 billion in qui tam cases, with whistleblowers receiving nearly 18% (or $184 million) of the government's recovery. When considering a qui tam action be certain, however, that the authorizing statute authorizes the action. ZALMA OPINION Insurance fraud is ever growing with estimates from $80 billion to $300 billion a year. The Qui Tam suit is a method to deter insurance fraud by hitting the fraud perpetrator in the pocket book and deter the crime when the state or federal government refuses to file criminal actions. © 2021 – Barry Zalma --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma/support

Explaining How Citizens Can Act to Defeat Insurance Fraud https://zalma.com/blog The False Claims Act, also known as the “Lincoln Law,” dates back to the Civil War. President Lincoln signed the act into law in 1863 because war profiteers were selling the Union Army shoddy supplies at inflated prices. The original law included qui tam [ “Qui tam” is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase “qui tam pro domino rege quam pro si ipso in hac parte sequitur” meaning “Who sues on behalf of the King as well as for himself.” There are a number of pronunciations of the Latin abbreviation qui tam. The simplest is key tam (rhymes with “ham.”) Black's Law Dictionary suggests kweye (rhymes with “eye”) tam.] provisions that allowed a private person (plaintiff) to sue those who defrauded the federal government. If the suit was successful the plaintiff would receive 50% of any recovery from the defendant. The qui tam provisions were weakened greatly as a result of congressional amendments in 1943, and qui tam legislation became virtually nonexistent. However, in 1986, Sen. Charles Grassley, R–Iowa, and Rep. Howard Berman, D Calif., joined forces to amend the law and strengthen the incentives for citizens to uncover and fight fraud as qui tam relators. (Relators are the private plaintiffs under the False Claims Act). The 1986 False Claims Act amendments received widespread bi-partisan support, and were signed into law by President Reagan. Since the revitalization, the qui tam provisions have increasingly been used. The False Claims Act makes it unlawful to knowingly (1) present or cause to be presented to the United States a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval, 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1) (2006); (2) make or use a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, § 3729(a)(1)(B); or (3) use a false record or statement to conceal or decrease an obligation to pay money to the United States, § 3729(a)(7) (2006). Under the Act, private individuals ... , referred to as “relators,” may file civil actions known as qui tam actions on behalf of the United States to recover money that the government paid as a result of conduct forbidden under the Act. © 2021 – Barry Zalma --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma/support

Explaining How Citizens Can Act to Defeat Insurance Fraud https://zalma.com/blog The False Claims Act, also known as the “Lincoln Law,” dates back to the Civil War. President Lincoln signed the act into law in 1863 because war profiteers were selling the Union Army shoddy supplies at inflated prices. The original law included qui tam [ “Qui tam” is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase “qui tam pro domino rege quam pro si ipso in hac parte sequitur” meaning “Who sues on behalf of the King as well as for himself.” There are a number of pronunciations of the Latin abbreviation qui tam. The simplest is key tam (rhymes with “ham.”) Black's Law Dictionary suggests kweye (rhymes with “eye”) tam.] provisions that allowed a private person (plaintiff) to sue those who defrauded the federal government. If the suit was successful the plaintiff would receive 50% of any recovery from the defendant. The qui tam provisions were weakened greatly as a result of congressional amendments in 1943, and qui tam legislation became virtually nonexistent. However, in 1986, Sen. Charles Grassley, R–Iowa, and Rep. Howard Berman, D Calif., joined forces to amend the law and strengthen the incentives for citizens to uncover and fight fraud as qui tam relators. (Relators are the private plaintiffs under the False Claims Act). The 1986 False Claims Act amendments received widespread bi-partisan support, and were signed into law by President Reagan. Since the revitalization, the qui tam provisions have increasingly been used. The False Claims Act makes it unlawful to knowingly (1) present or cause to be presented to the United States a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval, 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1) (2006); (2) make or use a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, § 3729(a)(1)(B); or (3) use a false record or statement to conceal or decrease an obligation to pay money to the United States, § 3729(a)(7) (2006). Under the Act, private individuals ... , referred to as “relators,” may file civil actions known as qui tam actions on behalf of the United States to recover money that the government paid as a result of conduct forbidden under the Act. © 2021 – Barry Zalma --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma/support

In their latest episode, Karen and Steve talk about some of the unforeseen difficulties of things returning to "normal," at least out in the world, and the challenges for those with kids who may be months away from vaccinations. They then welcome their dear friends, Caprice Roberts and Andy Wright, to talk about a whole lot of things, from moving with small kids to chasing your dreams (across the country) to starting a new law school to moving in and out of Congress and the Executive Branch.

Joseph, Greenwald and Laake has been representing clients in suburban Maryland and the District of Columbia for almost 50 years. With offices in Greenbelt and Rockville, Maryland, we have lawyers who focus their practices in diverse areas of the law, including employment and whistleblower actions, family law, estates and trusts, civil rights, business planning and commercial litigation, personal injury, medical and professional negligence. In this episode we have two JGL Attorneys, Veronica Nannis (https://www.jgllaw.com/attorneys/veronica-nannis) & Sarah Chu (https://www.jgllaw.com/attorneys/sarah-chu) . In this episode they answers the following questions and more... : 1. What is the meaning of the terms Qui Tam (https://www.jgllaw.com/practice-areas/false-claims-act-qui-tam-whistleblowers) & Whistleblower (https://www.jgllaw.com/practice-areas/false-claims-act-qui-tam-whistleblowers) ? 2. Does COVID relief packages have a potential for fraud? 3. What are some common types of COVID-19 fraud covered that might qualify as False Claims Act cases? 4. How are whistleblowers reporting COVID-19 fraud protected?  JGL LAW FOR YOU brings you up close and personal with our lawyers who will be discussing how to navigate the many legal processes,  developments in the law, other current events and how they may affect you.   You can find us at www.jgllaw.com (http://www.jgllaw.com/) , on facebook (https://www.facebook.com/JGLLaw/) and twitter (https://twitter.com/JGL_Law) .

Oftentimes people automatically assume they qualify as a whistleblower but unless there is a statute offering protection, they may be surprised about how little protection they have. This episode discusses whistleblowers under the False Claims Act for Medicare Fraud or Medicaid Fraud, Defense Contractor Fraud & PPP Fraud and who qualifies and who doesn't and why.

Qui Tam Actions generally are lawsuits in which an individual sues on behalf of a governmental entitiy, typically the Federal Government, with the goal of remedying a defrauding of the government by a private organization or individual. These actions typically take the form of a whistleblower exposing the defrauding actions of his or her employer. Qui tam actions in the US are often brought under the False Claims Act, a Federal law specifically empowering individuals to sue as whistleblowers to recover private funds garnered through defrauding the Federal Government. In the foreclosure context, individuals who are connected with, or in some cases simply apprised of, the defrauding behavior, can then bring a qui tam action to remedy the fraud. As a whistleblower, the suing individual is entitled to substantial compensation, including penalties, attorney's fees, court costs, on top of the disputed amount of the fraud. The whisteblower receives his or her compensation as a percentage of the fraud money recovered. This amount can and often does run into the millions of dollars, depending on the nature of the fraud and the amount in dispute. Bill will highlight a recent successful qui tam action and address previous qui tam matters, involving for example mortgage servicers such as Nationstar.

BGVV-174_QUI TAM_MONTREAL_05-10-1981 PodCast Channels Vô Vi Podcast - Vấn Đạo Vô Vi Podcast - Bài Giảng Vô Vi Podcast - Nhạc Thiền

Regarding relators filing qui tam and when is too late.

August 2015 - This month, we speak with Eileen Leslie, CFE, CPA and Financial Analyst at Forensic Strategic Solutions, about the role of a Certified Fraud Examiner when reviewing and filing, as well as testifying in, qui tam cases under the U.S. False Claims Act.

In this episode I visit with white collar defense and Qui Tam specialist Joel Androphy about prosecution of whistleblower claims at the federal and state level. Androphy explains what type of evidence is required to file such a claim, have the government take over the action and what a whistleblower may expect. It is a fascinating view from a whistleblower expert counsel at the state and federal level. Joel Androphy can be reached at jandrophy@bafirm.com. For more information about his practice areas, including whistleblower claims, False Claims Act lawsuits and Qui Tam claims; check out the firm website at bafirm.com.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Health Care Fraud and False Claims I hosted 2 False Claims Act legal experts on this week’s MAG edition of Top Docs Radio. You’re going to want to check out what they have to say, as it could mean the difference between practicing medicine or not, in the end. Scott Grubman is a partner with […] The post Health Care Fraud and False Claims – Top Docs Radio appeared first on Business RadioX ®.

Rene Thomas Folse, JD, Ph.D.is the host for this edition which reports on the following news stories. Court of Appeal Limits Discovery of HIV Patient Records in Employee Claim Against Hospital. Caremark Target of "Qui Tam" Whilstleblower Lawsuit Over Prescription Drugs. CIGA Dismissed Despite Special Employer's Coverage Agreement With General Employer. AIG And Major Carriers Continue Battle Over Alleged Premium Under-Reporting. 44 Charged in $100 Million Medicare Fraud Scheme. Temporary Total Disability Rate for 2011 Remains $986.69. Insurance Commissioner Poizner's Iranian Investment Moratorium Regulations Declared Invalid. City of Los Angeles Overhauls Workers' Comp Unit. CHSWC Study - Evaluating the QME Process: Is it Equitable and Efficient?

Medicare and medicaid fraud make up the biggest category of Qui Tam cases which are about whistleblowing on companies that are ripping off the federal government. Under a provision of federal law, an individual can file suit in the name of the Federal Government exposing fraud and share in the recovery of monies received. Join Ringler Radio host, Larry Cohen and co-host Jim Volanti of Ringler Associates with an expert in this area of legal practice, Attorney Brian Labovick, from the firm of LaBovick & LaBovick, Civil Justice Prosecutors with four offices in Palm Beach County, Florida. Don't miss hearing about some very interesting cases involving whistleblowers and how the system works.

Sometimes a chance meeting can take place when you grab the wrong airport shuttle. That’s exactly what happened to me when I arrived in San Francisco this past June. I shared a shuttle with Thomas Grande and his wife. Mr. Grande practices Qui Tam law and he gave me a brief education before we arrived […]