Latest Articles

In Rancosky v. Washington National Insurance Company, No. 28 WAP 2016, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court confirmed that, to prevail on a claim pursuant to Pennsylvania’s bad-faith statute, a policyholder does not have to prove that an insurance company acted with a “motive of self-interest or ill-will.”  While the Pennsylvania Superior Court had reached the same conclusion more than 20 years ago, the Supreme Court had never addressed the issue until just recently. Proving that an…
Last month, Lindsey provided readers of the Drug and Device Law blog with an overview of United Health Services, Inc. v. U.S. ex rel. Escobar, a False Claims Act (FCA) case that was bringing the implied certification theory of FCA liability before the U.S. Supreme Court for review. The FCA imposes liability on anyone who knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, false or fraudulent claims (or requests) for payment to the federal government.…
The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, No. 15-7, to review the “implied certification” theory of liability under the False Claims Act.  In recent years, that theory has been applied in a wide variety of circumstances with increased frequency, exposing defendants to substantial damages and penalties.  Because of this, the Supreme Court’s decision could result in significant changes to the scope of False Claims…