In Howell v. Town of Ball, a police officer in Ball, La., filed a retaliation suit under the False Claims Act against the town and several town officials. At the district court level, the town officials argued the police officer only had a cause of action against his employer, the town, under the False Claims Act. The court agreed, citing a False Claims Act subsection that creates a cause of action for those who have been “discriminated against in the terms and conditions of employment…,” according to the report.
On appeal, the plaintiff argued liability was extended to non-employer defendants in 2009 with an amendment to the False Claims Act that removed reference to “employer” in a subsection of the act. However, the appeals court disagreed, holding that reference to “employer” was deleted in the subsection to expand the class of False Claims Act plaintiffs to include “agents” and “contractors,” rather than to broaden the class of viable defendants, according to the report.
More articles on healthcare industry lawsuits:
UConn Health to pay $185k to settle overbilling allegations
Florida teen accused of posing as physician back in custody in Virginia
7 latest healthcare industry lawsuits, settlements
At the Becker's 11th Annual IT + Revenue Cycle Conference: The Future of AI & Digital Health, taking place September 14–17 in Chicago, healthcare executives and digital leaders from across the country will come together to explore how AI, interoperability, cybersecurity, and revenue cycle innovation are transforming care delivery, strengthening financial performance, and driving the next era of digital health. Apply for complimentary registration now.