NachtLaw, P.C. 
  • Home
  • About
    • Success Stories
  • Our Team
    • Attorneys
    • Staff
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact
Select Page

New Clarity for FCA Whistleblowers in Eastern District of Michigan

On behalf of NachtLaw, P.C. | Aug 5, 2014 | Nacht Law in the News

The scope of retaliation protection for whistleblowers alleging government fraud has always been a hard fought issue. The battle has only become more heated since the retaliation provisions of the False Claims Act were amended in 2009. Even though congress’ clear intention was to expand the zone of protection for whistleblowers making good faith reports of government fraud, lawyers for the government contractors continue to argue for a narrow and cabined approach to the law. That approach leaves would-be whistleblowers in an uncertain limbo about whether to report suspected fraud or whether they can be fired for doing so.

In a new opinion from the Eastern District of Michigan, District Judge Terrance Berg joins the growing chorus of courts following the language and intent of the revisions to protect whistleblowers: “Defendant’s position would hamstring prospective whistleblowers and run counter to the purposes of the FCA’s anti-retaliation provision” (31 U.S.C. 3730(h)).

In Ickes v. Nexcare Health Systems, LLC (No. 13-14260, E.D. Mich. Aug 4. 2014) the Defendant, operating a senior care and rehab center in South Lyon, Michigan, had argued that Ms. Ickes’ opposition to the practice of discharging patients on the basis of a change in insurance payer from Medicare to the lower paying Medicaid system was not protected activity because compliance with health care regulations was only a “condition of participation” and not a “condition of payment.” Rejecting the defendant’s argument, the district court noted that violation of Medicare regulations could also lead to cancellation of payments. Citing precedent from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in U.S. ex rel Hobbs v. Medquest (711 F.3d 707) (6th Cir. 2013), the district court noted that “a regulation may in some cases be a condition of payment and a condition of participation.” Regardless of the distinction, the district court found plaintiff’s efforts can be viewed as “efforts to stop one or more violations of this subchapter”-in the language of the FCA.

The district court’s opinion in Ickes v. Nexcare sets out a broad zone of protection for prospective whistleblowers in one of the clearest judicial statements so far available under the FCA amendments: “the Act protects an employee who is punished for his or her ‘efforts to stop’ violations of the FCA; it’s protection is not limited to only those employees whose complaints turn out to prove a violation of the FCA by a preponderance of the evidence. Such an interpretation would afford little protection for (and have a significant chilling effect on) whistleblowers, who are not FCA experts and are only able to report what they expect to be fraud or misconduct.”

The case can now proceed to discovery and trial following the Court’s clear rejection of unreasonably narrow readings of the False Claims Act’s whistleblower protection – and would be whistleblowers can have a little more confidence that the law will protect them from retaliation if they step forward to report suspected Medicare fraud.

Plaintiff Joanne Ickes is represented by the firm of Nacht, Roumel & Walker PC and whistleblower attorney David Blanchard. For case updates and questions about the law inquires can be directed to David Blanchard at www.nachtlaw.com.

Recent Posts

  • What to do when your child gets bullied
  • Jury awards husband and wife $11.4M over workplace discrimination
  • Can an employer discriminate against overweight employees?
  • Employers continue to discriminate against breastfeeding workers
  • 4 examples of age discrimination you might not notice

Archives

  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • February 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • February 2013
  • October 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012

Categories

  • Age Discrimination
  • American values
  • Articles
  • blog
  • Business Litigation
  • Comments
  • Disability
  • Employment Law
  • Events
  • Firm News
  • Nacht Law in the News
  • Title IX
  • Unemployment Benefits

RSS Feed

Subscribe To This Blog’s Feed

FindLaw Network

Don’t Hesitate

No substitute exists for sound legal counsel.

ANN ARBOR, MI

101 North Main Street, Suite 555
Ann Arbor, MI 48104

Phone: 888-312-7173

ANN ARBOR, MI MAP & DIRECTIONS

TRAVERSE CITY, MI

120 E Front St
2nd Floor Loft
Traverse City, MI 49684

Phone: 888-312-7173

TRAVERSE CITY, MI MAP & DIRECTIONS

BIRMINGHAM, MI

401 South Old Woodward Avenue, Suite 460
Birmingham, MI 48009

Phone: 888-312-7173

BIRMINGHAM, MI MAP & DIRECTIONS

TOLEDO, OH

One Seagate
Suite 685
Toledo, OH 43604

Phone: 888-312-7173

TOLEDO, OH MAP & DIRECTIONS
REVIEW US
Pay Invoice Visa Discover AM EX Law Pay
  • Follow
  • Follow
  • Follow
  • Follow

© 2019 NachtLaw, P.C.. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw, part of Thomson Reuters