Search Site
Menu
Qui Tam

Dallas Whistleblower Attorney Explains the False Claims Act and Pursues Qui Tam Actions

Understanding the False Claims Act and qui tam

For more than 35 years Steve Kardell has guided whistleblowers through qui tam claims authorized by the False Claims Act. This act provides that liability for damages can be tripled. It authorizes a penalty of $5,500 to $11,000 per claim for each false or fraudulent claim submitted to the U.S. government. Furthermore, the False Claims Act establishes the grounds and procedures for a specific type of legal action called qui tam.

Qui tam literally means “he who brings a case on behalf of our lord the King, and for himself.” It allows private citizens, referred to as a relator, to commence legal action on behalf of the federal government. The relator can bring a whistleblower suit when he or she knows that a party has knowingly submitted false claims to the government. False claims can arise from many different sources and transactions, but typically include:

  • Defense spending
    • Billing fraud by military contractors
    • Illegal hiring practices
  • Financial services
    • IRS tax fraud
    • Pension and financial service fees
  • Healthcare services
    • Medicare or Medicaid billing fraud
  • Government contractor or employee issues
    • Compensation for a “no-show” job
    • Misappropriation of government property or resources

What is the process for qui tam actions?

The qui tam process is extremely technical and is detailed in the False Claims Act. To start, a relator must be represented by an attorney — pro se litigation is not permitted. Federal law requires the qui tam complaint to be filed under seal, where it will remain for at least 60 days. Additionally, a disclosure statement must be filed that contains all substantial evidence. The complaint is added to a confidential docket and distributed to only the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and to the assigned U.S. District Court judge. Following the 60-day period, the DOJ must either file a motion showing good cause to keep the complaint under seal or allow the confidentiality to lapse. An investigation, typically coordinated across multiple government agencies, is launched.

At the end of the investigation, the DOJ must select from one of five potential courses of actions. Three are statutorily provided:

  • Intervene in one or more counts of the qui tam action
  • Decline to intervene in one or all counts of the pending qui tam action, though the relator and his or her attorney may still elect to pursue the action
  • Move to dismiss

Additionally, two more options are generally permitted that are not provided for by the statute:

  • Settle with the defendant
  • Inform the relator that the DOJ intends to decline to intervene

If the DOJ intends to intervene in the matter, it will file a notice informing all parties of the intervention, including the specific grounds for intervention and unseal the complaint. Once the complaint is unsealed, the attorney’s relator must serve the complaint on defendants within 120 days. Typically, about 60 days following the DOJ’s notice of intervention, the department will file its own complaint based on additional federal statutes and common laws.

Contact our attorney today in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex for guidance on reporting government fraud

The qui tam process is unique in the law and requires an attorney experienced in these matters. Attorney Steve Kardell can prepare you for this stressful and extremely technical process. To discuss the circumstances surrounding your potential qui tam action, please contact us at 214-306-8045 or online .

Honors
Our Office
  • Dallas Office
    4514 Cole Ave
    #600
    Dallas, Texas 75205
    Phone: 214-306-8045
    Fax: 469-729-9926
Testimonials
  • "Steve Kardell was terrific in representing me in some very adversarial discussions with Citigroup and also later represented me in my testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission."  -Richard Bowen, Citigroup Whistleblower

  • "Never thought my career would end like it did after 30 years of service. I was part of the first round of the so called reduction of force. I asked myself how can I be part of this with 30 years of seniority. How did they pick these 90 plus employees? Now, the culture of this organization made you question every decision they made. It wasn’t what you knew it’s was a culture of who you know. Nonetheless, I did not accept their severance package. I immediately starting looking for an attorney who would take on my case. After the initial call to Steve I had hope again. He was open and honest about everything and reassured me he would do his best for me, and he did. I had an awesome outcome. Thanks Steve you’re the best."  -S.S.

  • "Reaching out to Steve Kardell was the best decision I made. His ability to provide immediate insight and direction was very powerful, and a huge relief during a very stressful time period. For anyone struggling with a whistleblower situation, I would highly recommend at least speaking with Steve. After a 10 minute call with him, I had a better understanding of what I was dealing with. Even better, he gave me some immediate hope. In the end Steve did a better job than I thought was possible. Steve was able to get in contact with people in my organization, that I didn’t have access to. Because of his years of experience, he already has contacts in many organizations in Dallas. The entire situation was handled peacefully. I was impressed by his ability to “keep the peace”–rather than creating a battle with the organization. The reason I didn’t reach out to a lawyer initially, was because I thought it would mean an immediate end to any hope of a positive relationship with the company. Steve was able to address my concerns, and in the end I was able to continue to work for them."  -KS

FOLLOW US
Facebook Twitter Linkedin RSS Feed JD Supra