Key Takeaways from the SuperValu Case and Implications for the False Claims Act

On June 1, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Schutte v. SuperValu, Inc., held that the mental state required by the False Claims Act (FCA) refers to the defendant’s actual knowledge and subjective beliefs about the truth of claims for payment submitted to federal payers. The decision overturns the growing body of case law precluding FCA liability when a defendant’s interpretation of the applicable law was objectively reasonable regardless of the defendant’s actual knowledge. Joe Wolfe, Attorney, Hall Render Killian Heath & Lyman PC, speaks with David Lazarus, Partner, Verrill Dana LLP and Ilene Albala, Partner, Goodwin Procter LLP, about why this case is important and what the health care industry can do in response to the case. From AHLA’s Fraud and Abuse Practice Group.