Source: https://www.whistleblowerlawyerblog.com/part_3_the_false_claims_act_in_1/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 05:50:13+00:00

Document:
This is Part 3 by whistleblower lawyer blog of a detailed explanation of the major qui tam whistleblower statutes, the federal False Claims Act and the new state False Claims Acts. It is taken from a recently published article by whistleblower lawyer blog author Michael A. Sullivan, and is reprinted with the permisssion of the Georgia Bar Journal.
The Part 3 explains the history of the False Claims Act and why effective qui tam whistleblower laws are important.
The 1986 Amendments increased financial and other incentives for qui tam relators to bring suits on behalf of the government. Congress increased the damages recoverable by the government from double damages to treble damages, and increased the monetary penalties to a minimum of $5,000 and a maximum of $10,000 per false claim. The 1986 Amendments also increased the qui tam relator’s share of recovery to a range of 15% to 25% in cases in which the government intervenes, and 25% to 30% in cases in which the government does not intervene, plus attorney’s fees and costs.
12 See, e.g., Marvin v. Trout, 199 U.S. 212, 225 (1905) (“Statutes providing for actions by a common informer, who himself had no interest whatever in the controversy other than that given by statute, have been in existence for hundreds of years in England, and in this country ever since the foundation of our government.”) See generally CLAIRE M. SYLVIA, THE FALSE CLAIMS ACT: FRAUD AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT § 2.3, at 34-36 (West 2004).
13 SYLVIA, supra note 12, § 2:6, at 41.
14 Id. § 2:6, at 42 (quoting 1 FRED ALBERT SHANNON, THE ORIGINATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNION ARMY, 1861-65, at 55-56, 58 (1965) (other sources quoted omitted)).
15 Id. § 2:6, at 43 (quoting Cong. Globe, 37th Cong., 3d Sess., 955-56 (1863)).
16 Legislative History, supra note 5.
17 Act of March 2, 1863, ch. 67, § 6, 12 Stat. 698 (discussed in SYLVIA, supra note 12, § 2:6, at 44 & n.18).
18 Certain amendments to the Act did occur in the early 1900s. SYLVIA, supra note 12, § 2.6, at 44 & n.18. In addition, the United States Supreme Court declined to limit the Act’s application in 1937 in United States v. Kapp, 302 U.S. 214 (1937). In Kapp, the Supreme Court rejected the defendant’s argument that the government must show a monetary loss and that the representations in question were not material. Id. at 217-18.
19 United States v. Griswold, 24 F. 361, 365-66 (D. Or. 1885).
20 See generally JOHN T. BOESE, CIVIL FALSE CLAIMS AND QUI TAM ACTIONS §§ 1-9, 1-10 (1993).
21 Legislative History, supra note 5, at 11.
22 317 U.S. 537 (1943).
24 Act of December 23, 1943, ch. 377, 57 Stat. 608.
25 SYLVIA, supra note 12, § 2:8, at 51.
26 Legislative History, supra note 5.
27 S. 1562, 99th Cong., 2d Sess. (1986) (False Claims Reform Act) (discussed in Legislative History, supra note 5).
28 Legislative History, supra note 5, at 14.
29 See section III, infra, which appears in Part 4 of this article posted separately on whistleblower lawyer blog.

References: v. 
 § 2
 § 2
 § 2
 § 2
 § 6
 § 2
 § 2
 v. 
 v. 
 § 2