Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

False Claims Act

Read a random definition: eggshell skull rule

A quick definition of False Claims Act:

The False Claims Act is a law that punishes people who lie to the government to get money. This can include charging too much for something or not doing what they promised. People can report these lies in a special court case called a qui tam. If the case is successful, the person who reported it can get some of the money back. The government is the one who really sues the person who lied, but the person who reported it is called a relator.

A more thorough explanation:

The False Claims Act is a federal law that punishes individuals or companies who falsely bill the government, overstate the amount of a delivered product, or understate an obligation to the government. It allows private individuals to file lawsuits, called qui tam actions, against those who defraud the government.

For example, if an employee of a defense contractor discovers that their employer is defrauding the government, they can file a qui tam suit against the employer. If the suit is successful, the employee may receive up to 30% of the government's award.

The False Claims Act is enforced by either the Justice Department or private individuals. If the government intervenes in a qui tam suit, it takes over the case. If the government wins or settles, the relator (the person who initiated the suit) receives between 15% and 25% of the government's award. If the government does not intervene, the relator may choose to continue on their own. If the relator wins, they may recover up to 30% of the government's award.

Some False Claims Act relators are entitled to whistleblower protection, which means they cannot be fired or retaliated against for reporting fraud.

false arrest | false imprisonment

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
i've been away for a while what were the most recent waves? any this week?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.