David Pivnick

Yeah, so you're right on with the numbers. In any given year, it's in that 20% to 25% ballpark that the government intervenes. Now, it isn't necessarily the case that that the remainder would all go out if it was fair and unconstitutional, because part of what might happen is, you know, it's possible DOJ would intervene more frequently. There might be other steps that were taken to protect cases.

Yeah, so you're right on with the numbers. In any given year, it's in that 20% to 25% ballpark that the government intervenes. Now, it isn't necessarily the case that that the remainder would all go out if it was fair and unconstitutional, because part of what might happen is, you know, it's possible DOJ would intervene more frequently. There might be other steps that were taken to protect cases.

I do think there's a significant number of cases, some of which, you know, unfortunately for my clients, like I've had multiple cases where I've represented clients who really didn't do anything wrong, full stop, period. There was no

I do think there's a significant number of cases, some of which, you know, unfortunately for my clients, like I've had multiple cases where I've represented clients who really didn't do anything wrong, full stop, period. There was no

I do think there's a significant number of cases, some of which, you know, unfortunately for my clients, like I've had multiple cases where I've represented clients who really didn't do anything wrong, full stop, period. There was no

merit to it, but they are in a position where it is incredibly expensive to defend these cases and incredibly risky in case you have a judgment against because of that penalty scheme. There is a lot of cases I think annually that end up getting settled for relatively low amounts because people are ultimately concerned about the outside liability. I think a lot of those cases

merit to it, but they are in a position where it is incredibly expensive to defend these cases and incredibly risky in case you have a judgment against because of that penalty scheme. There is a lot of cases I think annually that end up getting settled for relatively low amounts because people are ultimately concerned about the outside liability. I think a lot of those cases

merit to it, but they are in a position where it is incredibly expensive to defend these cases and incredibly risky in case you have a judgment against because of that penalty scheme. There is a lot of cases I think annually that end up getting settled for relatively low amounts because people are ultimately concerned about the outside liability. I think a lot of those cases

would fall away, and I think, frankly, very much appropriately so. I think the bigger cases, both in terms of dollars and targets and the risk, and particularly where the conduct is egregious, the DOJ would be picking up anyway. And so those would not be falling away. And again, I don't view it as one where someone could get away

would fall away, and I think, frankly, very much appropriately so. I think the bigger cases, both in terms of dollars and targets and the risk, and particularly where the conduct is egregious, the DOJ would be picking up anyway. And so those would not be falling away. And again, I don't view it as one where someone could get away

would fall away, and I think, frankly, very much appropriately so. I think the bigger cases, both in terms of dollars and targets and the risk, and particularly where the conduct is egregious, the DOJ would be picking up anyway. And so those would not be falling away. And again, I don't view it as one where someone could get away

With wrongdoing, I view it more as avoiding improperly incentivizing people to bring claims knowing that there might not be anything there, but they're likely to be able to shake out a decent settlement if they can survive a motion to dismiss.

With wrongdoing, I view it more as avoiding improperly incentivizing people to bring claims knowing that there might not be anything there, but they're likely to be able to shake out a decent settlement if they can survive a motion to dismiss.

With wrongdoing, I view it more as avoiding improperly incentivizing people to bring claims knowing that there might not be anything there, but they're likely to be able to shake out a decent settlement if they can survive a motion to dismiss.

Yeah, absolutely. And I mean, the numbers fluctuate year to year over the last five to 10 years, the number in total government fraud recoveries, it is typically in the $3 to $5 billion range. There's some exceptions slightly higher than the $5 billion mark, some exceptions that are in the $2 to $3 billion range, but that $3 to $5 billion

Yeah, absolutely. And I mean, the numbers fluctuate year to year over the last five to 10 years, the number in total government fraud recoveries, it is typically in the $3 to $5 billion range. There's some exceptions slightly higher than the $5 billion mark, some exceptions that are in the $2 to $3 billion range, but that $3 to $5 billion

Yeah, absolutely. And I mean, the numbers fluctuate year to year over the last five to 10 years, the number in total government fraud recoveries, it is typically in the $3 to $5 billion range. There's some exceptions slightly higher than the $5 billion mark, some exceptions that are in the $2 to $3 billion range, but that $3 to $5 billion

range has been where the recoveries have been for most of the last several years, probably dating back at this point, the better part of a decade. Most years, as you alluded to, the overwhelming majority of those dollars are in cases where the government intervenes. So again, the government's intervening one in four, one in five

range has been where the recoveries have been for most of the last several years, probably dating back at this point, the better part of a decade. Most years, as you alluded to, the overwhelming majority of those dollars are in cases where the government intervenes. So again, the government's intervening one in four, one in five

range has been where the recoveries have been for most of the last several years, probably dating back at this point, the better part of a decade. Most years, as you alluded to, the overwhelming majority of those dollars are in cases where the government intervenes. So again, the government's intervening one in four, one in five