In the latest example of the Roberts court reining in the government’s use of broadly worded criminal statutes, on June 26, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Snyder that the federal bribery statute does not extend to after-the-fact gifts and gratuities. The Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 666 requires a corrupt
On April 17, 2024, the seven-member panel of the U.S. Sentencing Commission voted to adopt an amendment prohibiting judges from using acquitted conduct in applying the federal sentencing guidelines. Previously, and consistent with the decision in United States. v. Watts, 519 U.S. 148, 157 (1997) (per curiam) (holding that “a jury’s verdict of acquittal
On Friday, July 21, 2023, DOJ announced it has reached a $377,453,150 settlement with Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation (Booz Allen), the parent company of Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc., the large government and military contractor that also has commercial and international customers. DOJ alleged that Booz Allen violated the False Claims Act by “improperly billing
In its June 14, 2023, decision in United States ex rel. Michelle Calderon v. Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC, No. 22-1553, 2023 WL 3991013, (7th Cir. 2023), the Seventh Circuit explained the high bar for relators to prove proximate causation in FCA suits based on alleged false certifications of mortgage loans for Federal Housing Administration
On March 3, the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice announced a two-part pilot program to encourage corporations to implement compliance programs with provisions for employee compensation incentives and clawbacks designed to prevent corporate crime. Last week, at the American Bar Association’s 38th Annual National Institute on White Collar Crime, Deputy Attorney General
Industry organizations in business, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, and medical technology filed amicus briefs this week in support of the False Claims Act (FCA) defendants in the Supreme Court case United States, ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc. As previously reported here, this case raises whether the government has the proper authority to dismiss