Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP

Fried Frank has been on the cutting edge of qui tam litigation for more than 20 years. Our attorneys have extensive experience in nearly every facet of the Civil False Claims Act (FCA).

Much of our work has been precedent-setting. We were one of the first firms to brief and argue that the qui tam provisions are unconstitutional. We also were one of the first advocates to address the question of whether government officials could become qui tam relators. We were the first to take the defense of an FCA "whistleblower" retaliation case to a jury trial and win. In addition, we handled one of the first voluntary disclosures to the HHS IG and favorably resolved the resulting FCA and administrative liability.

Under the FCA, the United States Department of Justice, as well as private whistleblowers, can recover treble damages and enormous civil penalties from those in a wide variety of industries – healthcare, pharmaceutical, defense, information technology, import/export, oil and gas – which pay or receive federal money. Qui tam cases of any import are ultimately controlled by Justice Department attorneys, and we deal on a daily basis with these decision-makers.

The government recovered almost $3 billion dollars in 2006 in False Claims Act and qui tam cases, and recoveries will steadily increase. In addition, many states have adopted state false claims acts, which increase the scope and nature of the potential liability faced by companies.

We represent not only defense contractors and healthcare companies, but also those not normally associated with federal fraud investigations:

• Airport authorities
• Computer manufacturers
• Major universities
• Import and export companies
• Major accounting and consulting firms
• Magazine publishers
• Oil and gas exploration companies

We also periodically publish the FraudMail Alert^®, an email service that provides timely updates on recent cases and developments involving civil and criminal fraud issues and qui tam actions.

Qui Tam: Selected Representations:

From the Defense Industry to Healthcare

• United States ex rel. Gober v. University of Alabama at Birmingham. We represented a major academic medical institution in a federal investigation prompted by two qui tam actions alleging healthcare fraud in connection with the award and performance of grants from the National Institutes of Health and other federal sponsors.
• United States ex rel. Susan Heath v. Dallas/Forth Worth International Airport Board. We represented the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board in a qui tam case brought under the federal civil False Claims Act. The plaintiff sought over $600 million in damages and penalties. The case was unsealed in 1999. The firm advised the client and assisted local counsel with regard to the False Claims Act issues throughout the litigation. The case went to trial in July 2006, and a federal jury returned a verdict in favor of our client on all claims.
• United States ex rel. Longstaffe v. Litton Industries. We represented a defense contractor in a qui tam action alleging improprieties in connection with the company's use of foreign consultants. The District Court dismissed the case on the grounds that the matter had been publicly disclosed and the relator was not an "original source" of the allegations.
• United States ex rel. Goldstein v. Fabricare, et al. We represented a number of textile supply companies in a series of qui tam complaints filed in U.S. District Court for Maryland. On our motions, the District Court dismissed the actions under Rule 9(b). We then were lead counsel for all of the defendants in the consolidated appeal in the Fourth Circuit, where the appellate court affirmed the dismissals.
• United States ex rel. Tribble v. Aerospatiale General Aviation. We represented an aircraft manufacturer in a qui tam case alleging false certifications regarding the country of origin and manufacture of aircraft purchased under a Foreign Military Sales contract.
• United States ex rel. ATMI v. The Limited, Inc. We represented a number of garment importers who were accused in a qui tam case of falsifying export documents by a major trade association. In this so-called "reverse false claims" action, the association alleged that the defendant violated the FCA by falsifying data submitted to federal agencies. The relator claimed damages and penalties in the billions. We successfully argued that the action should be dismissed, because taking action to avoid a potential fine or penalty does not fall within the prohibitions of the FCA. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, ruling that a potential fine or penalty is not an existing "obligation" to the government, under the FCA.
• United States ex rel. Mock v. Lockheed Martin, et al. We represented a company that managed and operated a major nuclear facility for the United States Department of Energy. The company was accused of violating the FCA by falsely certifying in its invoices that it complied with environmental laws. We obtained summary judgment on all significant claims against our client.
• United States ex rel. Ridenour v. Kaiser-Hill, et al. We represented a contractor that managed and operated a DOE nuclear facility. Our client was accused of falsifying its performance regarding security at the site. The Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the case by the Government.
• United States ex rel. Barajas v. Northrop. We represented Northrop Grumman Corporation in two appeals of favorable judgments by the District Court. These appeals addressed issues including the "original source" jurisdictional requirements for a qui tam relator and the res judicata effect of a settlement with the government on a "severed" action by the qui tam relator. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of this lawsuit.
• United States ex rel. Russell v. Epic Healthcare. We represented a home health agency and its subsidiaries in a qui tam case alleging that Medicare was billed for unnecessary services and for services to ineligible beneficiaries. The District Court dismissed the action for failure to state a claim, and the Fifth Circuit affirmed in an opinion now routinely cited by defendants.
• United States ex rel. Croswell v. Northrop. We represented Northrop Grumman in the qui tam relator's appeal of the District Court's grant of summary judgment for Northrop on the false claims allegation and the jury's verdict for Northrop on the relator's personal "whistleblower" retaliation claims. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment in favor of Northrop.
• United States ex rel. LeBlanc v. Raytheon. We represented Raytheon in an appeal addressing both issues of res judicata and the standing of government employees to bring qui tam actions. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment in favor of our client.
• United States ex rel. Shumer v. Hughes Aircraft. We filed an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court for the American Medical Association, the American Association of Medical Colleges and the American Hospital Association addressing the specific concerns of the healthcare industry on the meaning of a "false claim" under the FCA and the elements that plaintiffs must prove to make out a false claims violation.
• United States ex rel. Thompson v. Columbia Healthcare Corp., et al. We filed an amicus brief on behalf of the American Hospital Association addressing the issue of whether violations of the Anti-Kickback Act and the Stark law constitute violations of the civil FCA.
• R&F Properties Cert Petition. We represented the petitioner in an appeal to the Supreme Court involving a key issue of False Claims Act law. We were not involved below and were retained for the Supreme Court appeal. In R&F Properties v. United States ex rel Walker, we filed a petition for certiorari on behalf of several physicians seeking Supreme Court review of whether a False Claims Act case can be brought based on an admittedly ambiguous regulation or contract provision. The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America ("PhRMA") and Washington Legal Foundation have filed amicus briefs in support of the petition, noting the critical importance of this issue for False Claims Act defendants. The petition for certiorari is currently pending.
• Northrop Grumman Newport News. We represented Northrop Grumman Newport News in a qui tam lawsuit alleging that the Company knowingly accepted valves from a supplier that were not properly manufactured and tested and used these nonconforming valves in submarines and aircraft carriers supplied to the United States Navy. The whistleblower alleged tens of millions of dollars in damages. Based on presentations made to the Justice Department, the United States elected not to intervene in the lawsuit against Northrop Grumman. The case eventually settled with our client paying a small fraction of the damages claimed by the plaintiff. In subsequent litigation over plaintiff's petition for attorneys fees, the trial court cut the fee request by more than 35%.

Diversity and Inclusion

Ours is a stimulating, open-minded and progressive environment, where we respect and build upon the assets and talents of everyone at the Firm.

Diverse perspectives enrich the experience of our colleagues and, ultimately, the service we provide to our clients.  We actively seek to reflect the diversity of the global community in which we work and live.

Our Firm is committed to maintaining an inclusive environment and fostering a professional atmosphere that promotes equal opportunity and prohibits discriminatory practices.  Our Diversity Committee provides a forum for identifying, prioritizing and discussing diversity issues, as well as for developing and supporting related proposals, initiatives and programs.  

We offer a multicultural and varied workplace.  Minorities and women lead several Firm practices and participate actively in governance activities.  In fact, our chairperson is a woman.

At Fried Frank, diversity is a standard principle.