The U.S. Supreme Court continues to be reluctant to step into the issue of how to define materiality under the False Claims Act, rejecting two petitions on the subject April 1.
Materiality concerns whether the government would have withheld payment to a contractor had it known about alleged noncompliance. Both petitions concerned the effect of continued payments to contractors on the issue of materiality.
“It appears to be part of the Supreme Court’s trend not to further define the materiality standard under Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar and to continue to allow the lower courts ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
Learn About Bloomberg Law
AI-powered legal analytics, workflow tools and premium legal & business news.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools.