Case Study: Chapman Law Firm V. US

Law360, New York (February 13, 2012, 1:25 PM EST) -- In order to resolve the "falsity" element in many False Claims Act cases, courts often must grapple with the meaning of the contractual or regulatory term alleged to have been violated. The issue often is presented for court resolution when the FCA defendant argues that the relevant terms are ambiguous or, at worst, subject to a reasonable interpretation that obviates the claimed violation.

Many courts faced with such ambiguity arguments in FCA cases have deferred the issue with respect to FCA "falsity" and have instead addressed...
To view the full article, register now.