The Fourth Circuit recently held, in an unpublished opinion, that the anti-retaliation or “whistleblower” provisions of the False Claims Act (“FCA”) protect an individual’s efforts to stop a contractor from violating the FCA, even when there is no “distinct possibility” of litigation.
The Fourth Circuit recently issued a decision interpreting the anti-retaliation provision of the False Claims Act (FCA).
When should debt be recharacterized as equity?
In a close Supreme Court decision the justices voted (4-to-4) against reinstating North Carolina’s identification requirement, meaning voters won’t have to show one of several qualifying photo IDs when casting ballots in the battleground state this November and early voting reverts to 17 days. With the decision coming so closely after the Fourth Circuit just struck down the voting laws, a question lingers in the air: What will it take for the conservative bloc on the high court to vote against voter ID laws?
On August 22, 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a decision in Carlson v. DynCorp International LLC, affirming the district court’s dismissal of an ex-employee’s retaliation suit under the False Claims Act’s (FCA) anti-retaliation provision, 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h).