Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Notwithstanding the absence of an explicit gag order in the statute, the DOJ takes the position that, even if the relator properly files the case under seal at the outset, that relator can later “breach the seal,” and be subject to judicial sanction, if he or she discloses the existence of the qui tam to others.
Editor’s Note: As discussed in Part One of this article, investigations of False Claim Act violations that are initiated as a result of a sealed qui tam complaint raise the question: While the relator and the government are bound by the seal and so cannot reveal the existence of the case or its particulars, does the same apply to the target of the claim? The authors continue their analysis here.
*May exclude premium content
By Jacqueline C. Wolff, Scott T. Lashway, and Matthew M.K. Stein
In times of crisis, criminal activity — particularly crimes involving theft and fraud — tend to spike. There is no reason to believe that the Covid-19 pandemic and the unrest in the financial markets will be any different. An important difference for company counsel, however, will be in how the malfeasance, negligence or wrongdoing can be investigated.
By John Kelly
The COVID-19 pandemic is resulting in landlords and tenants closely reviewing a clause in their lease that was long considered unimportant boilerplate. Yes, we are referring to the “force majeure” provision.
By C. Ryan Barber
In a practice that prizes in-person meetings, virtual communication has become commonplace.
By Elkan Abramowitz and Jonathan Sack
This article discusses the standard for ordering a bill of particulars in the Second Circuit, drawing a comparison with the standard for civil fraud claims, and then describes a recent decision ordering a bill of particulars in the high-profile prosecution growing out of the Theranos blood-testing scandal. The decision in that case highlights the importance of seeking bills of particulars in fraud cases.