United Health Services v. United States ex rel. Escobar

Goodwin filed an amicus brief on behalf of its client, the Generic Pharmaceutical Association, in this False Claims Act case. Goodwin lawyers argued that the First Circuit’s holding that mere regulatory violations could give rise to a False Claims Act claim could result in massive and disproportionate liability for compliance issues that are meant to be addressed by administrative and executive agencies in a much more careful and deliberate manner. Though the Supreme Court did not adopt Goodwin’s argument in total, it did tighten up the FCA’s materiality requirement to make clear that liability cannot be premised on any statutory, regulatory, or contractual violation—an interpretation that the Court referred to as an “extraordinarily expansive view of liability.”

United Health Services v. United States ex rel. Escobar

Download PDF

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *