Whistleblower Law Collaborative attorney David Lieberman was recently quoted in Law 360’s discussion of the fallout from the Supreme Court’s SuperValu decision.
SuperValu was a recent 9-0 Supreme Court ruling rejecting the controversial conclusion — championed by defendants — that the FCA doesn’t punish legal violations if they follow an “objectively reasonable,” legal interpretation, even a defendant knew their interpretation was wrong. That interpretation threatened to entirely undermine False Claims Act enforcement by permitting defendants to knowingly violate the law so long as they could find a lawyer who would later argue the interpretation complied with the language of the law.
Since the Supreme Court issued its opinion in SuperValu, a number of courts have cited the precedent as authority that juries, not judges, should decide a defendants state of mind.
As David Lieberman explained to Law360 courts citing Supervalu,
are reading SuperValu to say that disputes as to scienter are presumptively jury questions… In that respect, I think the SuperValu decision was a net loss for defendants.
We are seeing in real time how the theoretical uncertainties of scienter are bringing benefits to defendants. But the effects of SuperValu are only beginning, we shall see how it all plays out.
Whistleblower Law Collaborative LLC, based in Boston, devotes its practice entirely to representing clients nationwide in bringing actions under the federal and state whistleblower laws and programs, False Claims Acts, and other whistleblower programs. We are in our 20th year representing whistleblowers in False Claims Act and other whistleblower matters.
If you are considering becoming a whistleblower or are aware of other types of fraud, contact us for a free, confidential consultation.
