The federal government is at a risk of fraud because of contracts it makes with and resources it provides to private companies. For example, the federal government contracts with private construction companies to work on federally funded development projects. Another example is money paid to private health care providers as a result of Medicare and Medicaid claims. Unfortunately, it can be difficult for the federal government to detect fraud. That is where the False Claims Act (FCA) comes into play. 

The FCA is a federal law that helps protect the federal government from fraud. In fact, according to the Department of Justice, in the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020, more than $2.2 billion in settlements and judgments were obtained as a result of civil cases brought under the FCA. The FCA allows private citizens to file lawsuits against those defrauding the government on behalf of the government. These are called qui tam lawsuits. 

The FCA is structured the way it is because those who are the most likely to learn about potential fraud against the government are the employees of the companies that are receiving the federal funds. For example, an administrative assistant at a healthcare clinic may learn of false claims being submitted to Medicare, or a payroll specialist may learn of improper payment of required prevailing wage on federally funded construction projects. 

To establish a winning qui tam action, there must be: (1) a false statement or fraudulent course of conduct, (2) made knowingly, (3) that was material, and (4) caused the government to pay out money or to forfeit moneys due. See United States ex rel King v. Solvay Pharm., Inc., 871 F.3d 318, 323-24 (5th Cir. 2017) (citing United States ex rel. Longhi v. United States, 575 F.3d 458, 467 (5th Cir. 2009)). To simplify, a successful qui tam action requires intentional, successful fraud on the government. 

This is a high burden. Accordingly, an employee who suspects fraud may want to investigate first before taking any further action. Indeed, it makes sense for the government to encourage such investigation prior to filing. If an employee determines on their own no fraud is occurring, it will save the government time, energy, and effort it would otherwise have to expend to investigate after an action is filed. 

The question remains, would an employee who decides to investigate potential fraud prior to filing be protected from retaliation if their employer discovers the employee was looking into potential fraud? The answer is yes. Again, it makes sense that the law would encourage employees to investigate on their own. And to encourage such action, the employees must be protected from retaliation regardless of whether fraud is actually occurring. If the law did not provide such protection, why would an employee risk investigating? Likely, they would not.

Courts have made clear that employees are not required to establish an underlying violation of the FCA in order to succeed on a retaliation claim. See Hutchins v. Wilentz, Godman & Spitzer, 253 F.3d 176, 187 (3rd Cir. 2001). A successful underlying qui tam action is not necessary to a FCA retaliation claim. See id. 

Determining what activities constitute “protected conduct” is a fact specific inquiry. But the case law indicates that “the protected conduct element . . . does not require the plaintiff to have developed a winning qui tam action. . . . It only requires that the plaintiff engage in ‘acts . . . in furtherance of an action under [the False Claims Act].’”

Id. (citing United States ex rel. Yesudian v. Howard Univ., 153 F.3d 731, 739 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (quoting 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h)).).

If you have faced retaliation for investigating or reporting your employer’s potential fraudulent actions against the federal government, you should consult with an employment attorney to explore your options. 

Also, to learn more about qui tam actions, check out my Dallas colleague Deontae Wherry’s blog on the subject: 

https://www.dallasemploymentlawyer.com/the-false-claims-act-suing-your-employer-on-behalf-of-the-government/

Print:
EmailTweetLikeLinkedIn
Photo of Julie St. John Julie St. John

We asked Julie L. St. John, an experienced Trial Attorney in the Houston office of Rob Wiley, P.C., to impart her candid answers to a range of questions. After reading, you will be more more informed on the well-respected reputation that Ms.

We asked Julie L. St. John, an experienced Trial Attorney in the Houston office of Rob Wiley, P.C., to impart her candid answers to a range of questions. After reading, you will be more more informed on the well-respected reputation that Ms. St. John carries.

1. Why did you start practicing labor and employment law?

Because I care about the rights of employees and believe all workers should be treated fairly. 

2. If you could write a new law, what would it do?

Guarantee a living wage for all workers.

 3. Besides Rob Wiley, P.C., what is the most interesting job that you have had?

I worked as the beer cart girl at a golf course in college. 

4. What’s the best part of living in Houston?

Houston is clearly the best city in Texas, way better than Austin or Dallas. The people are wonderful, and the food is delicious. The only downside is the traffic, which is why I refuse to go outside of the loop (with a key exception for Ikea).

 5. If you were not practicing labor and employment law what would you be?

I would start a gardening/landscaping company with animals that do the work. The goats would eat the weeds, the pigs would till the ground, and the chickens would keep the bugs away.

6. Why did you decide to become a lawyer?

To have another tool to use to fight for things I believe in. I’ve always wanted to change the world.

7. What do you do when you’re not practicing law?

Travel, watch Ohio State football, and work to make my cat instafamous.

8. What’s your favorite legal movie

The Pelican Brief because it features Tulane Law!

9. Have you ever learned something from one of your clients?

I learn something from almost all of my clients. Most importantly, courage.

10. Who do you most admire as a lawyer?

Kalandra Wheeler

Julie L. St. John is a Trial Attorney in the Houston office of Rob Wiley, P.C. She graduated from Ohio State University with her bachelor’s degree in 2007. Ms. St. John then graduated from Tulane University School of Law in 2017.