Advocates for Justice

A recently published Ninth Circuit case interpreting the California False Claims Act proved relatively non-controversial, despite involving a dispute at the fringes of the abortion wars. In the case, Gonzalez v Planned Parenthood, 759 F.3d 1112 (9th Cir. 2014) (“Gonzalez”), a former Planned Parenthood director sued the organization’s Los Angeles branch under the federal False Claims Act and the California False Claims Act, alleging that Planned Parenthood overcharged California’s Medi-Cal program (specifically, Medi-Cal’s “Family PACT” program) for contraceptives provided to low-income individuals. The relator was represented in the case by the American Center for Law & Justice, a conservative Christian law firm founded by Pat Robertson. The lawsuit was presumably inspired (at least in part) by ideological disdain for the work of Planned Parenthood.

The Center for Investigative Reporting published a 4,000-word article yesterday detailing a Southern California medical equipment supplier’s scheme to use private plane rides, international vacations and cash-stuffed envelopes to recruit doctors to use his company to buy spinal surgery screws – many of which were apparently counterfeit. 

In a high-profile case with potentially national implications, a San Mateo County Superior Court judge sided in September with Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy client Surfrider Foundation and ordered Silicon Valley billionaire Vinod Khosla to stop blocking public access to a Northern California beach used and enjoyed for nearly a century by families, fishermen, surfers, and other members of the community. Khosla had gated off a road leading from Highway One to the beach in 2010, two years after buying most of the land fronting the beach for $32.5 million.

Even as recent federal rulings threaten to narrow the scope of anti-retaliation protections provided to individuals who report violations of America’s securities law, the Dodd-Frank Act’s whistleblower program continues to grow – both in the raw number of apparent violations brought to the attention of federal authorities and in the size of monetary rewards issued to whistleblowers. 

Criminals and fraudsters often target senior citizens and military veterans – residents who have given much, and who are sometimes among the most vulnerable members of a community. According to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, 70 percent of assets in the United States are in the hands of seniors (defined as citizens who are over 65 years of age.)

The California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform (CANHR) has reportedly observed a disturbing uptick in elder abuse centered on the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (“VA”) Aid and Attendance benefit. Aid and Attendance is a financial need-based benefit to help senior veterans who need assistance to pay for in–home care, assisted living facilities, or nursing homes. The program provides an important benefit to our nation’s elderly veterans. Unfortunately, due to the reality that some opportunists view senior veterans as attractive targets for scams, proceeding with caution is paramount.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank), signed into federal law by President Barack Obama on July 21, 2010, created a ground-breaking new agency: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The CFPB aims to protect Main Street America from Wall Street abuses. Moreover, the Bureau operates under an explicit mandate to protect senior citizens.

Defendants often attack actions brought under the California False Claims Act by arguing that the complaint does not provide sufficient specificity. Such attacks ignore two fundamental principles of pleading.

Citing a half-century of trial experience spanning the gamut of the law—from civil rights to antitrust, securities fraud to the representation of outed CIA spy Valerie Plame—Law360 selected CPM founding partner Joseph Cotchett as a “Titan of the Plaintiffs Bar” in September. 

More than five years have passed since President Obama signed into law several important, relator-friendly amendments to the False Claims Act as part of the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (“FERA”), S. 386 (introduced by Senators Leahy and Grassley). Those amendments, however, are as important today as they were then, and thus a review of those changes—and how they affect FCA whistleblowers (“relators”) and whistleblower attorneys—is warranted.