The Supreme Court today said the False Claims Act is not “an all-purpose antifraud statute” or “a vehicle for punishing garden-variety breaches of contract or regulatory violations.” In a decision in Universal Health Services Inc. v. United States and Massachusetts ex rel. Julio Escobar and Carmen Correa, the Court rejected the government’s and plaintiff’s expansive view that a case may be brought based on noncompliance with any requirement in statute, regulation or contract so long as the defendant knew the government could refuse payment were it aware of the violation. “As the Court recognized, hospitals and others who bill the government are ‘subject to thousands of complex statutory and regulatory provisions,’” said AHA Senior Vice President and General Counsel Melinda Reid Hatton. “The Court went on to impose a rigorous test to determine which of the myriad rules and regulations governing health care providers actually matter when the government decides to pay a claim. The FCA only comes into play when a rule or regulation actually matters.” AHA and others filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case. AHA members today received a Special Bulletin with more information.

Related News Articles

Headline
The AHA today filed a friend-of-the-court brief in United States ex rel. Berntsen v. Prime Healthcare Services et al., urging the federal court “to…
Headline
The AHA and Catholic Health Association of the United States today urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit to affirm a lower court ruling that…
Headline
Heeding concerns raised by the AHA and others, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Feb. 11 issued a final rule that requires providers to…
Headline
The AHA, Federation of American Hospitals, and Association of American Medical Colleges yesterday asked the Supreme Court to reverse a federal appeals court…
Headline
The Supreme Court today reversed a 4th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that greatly expanded the reach of the False Claims Act by applying the Wartime…