Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The False Claims Act (FCA), enacted shortly after the Civil War, allows private parties, known as relators, to bring qui tam actions on behalf of the United States government for violating the Act, and awards those parties up to 30% of all monies recovered. See 31 U.S.C. ' 3730(d). Similarly, under the new Dodd-Frank Act regulations, whistleblowers may reap up to 30% of the damages over $1 million. But for lawyers, there's more to the calculus than just the potential payouts. Disclosing client confidences is fraught with difficult legal and ethical issues that are only further complicated when financial incentive drives disclosure.
While the FCA does not expressly prohibit an attorney-relator, a recent opinion from the Southern District of New York, United States ex rel. Fair Lab. Practices Assocs. v. Quest Diagnostics Inc., 05-Civ-5393, 2011 WL 1330542 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 4, 2011), indicates that lawyers will typically be prohibited from bringing qui tam actions against their former clients. And the new Dodd-Frank regulations expressly limit when an attorney can reap a whistleblower reward.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.