Key Takeaways from the SuperValu Case and Implications for the False Claims Act

On June 1, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Schutte v. SuperValu, Inc., held that the mental state required by the False Claims Act (FCA) refers to the defendant’s actual knowledge and subjective beliefs about the truth of claims for payment submitted to federal payers. The decision overturns the growing body of case law precluding FCA liability when a defendant’s interpretation of the applicable law was objectively reasonable regardless of the defendant’s actual knowledge. Joe Wolfe, Attorney, Hall Render Killian Heath & Lyman PC, speaks with David Lazarus, Partner, Verrill Dana LLP and Ilene Albala, Partner, Goodwin Procter LLP, about why this case is important and what the health care industry can do in response to the case. From AHLA’s Fraud and Abuse Practice Group.Essential Legal Updates, Now in Audio AHLA's popular Health Law Daily email newsletter is now a daily podcast, exclusively for AHLA Premium members. Get all your health law news from the major media outlets on this podcast! To subscribe and add this private podcast feed to your podcast app, go to americanhealthlaw.org/dailypodcast. Stay At the Forefront of Health Legal Education Learn more about AHLA and the educational resources available to the health law community at https://www.americanhealthlaw.org/.

There are no comments yet.

Please log in to write the first comment.