{"id":4441,"date":"2012-08-17T23:53:00","date_gmt":"2012-08-17T23:53:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/?p=4441"},"modified":"2021-11-02T23:54:38","modified_gmt":"2021-11-02T23:54:38","slug":"qui-tam-relator-not-original-source-u-s-ex-rel-repko-v-guthrie-clinic","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/2012\/08\/17\/qui-tam-relator-not-original-source-u-s-ex-rel-repko-v-guthrie-clinic\/","title":{"rendered":"Qui Tam Relator Not Original Source; U.S. ex rel. Repko v. Guthrie Clinic"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In\u00a0U.S. ex rel. Repko v. Guthrie Clinic et al.<\/em><\/a>,\u00a0<\/em>the Third Circuit recently ended an attempt by Rodney Repko, former general counsel and executive vice president for Guthrie Healthcare System and its related entities, to bring a\u00a0qui tam\u00a0<\/em>case against his former employer.\u00a0 After he left his job at Guthrie, Repko allegedly attempted to steal two million dollars by forging the name of Guthrie officials on loan documents.\u00a0 As part of a plea agreement to bank fraud charges, prosecutors required Repko to cooperate by \u201cproviding information concerning the unlawful activities of others.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Within months of purportedly informing the government about questionable Guthrie arrangements, Repko filed a qui tam <\/em>action under the federal False Claims Act (FCA), alleging those same Guthrie arrangements violated the Stark and Anti-Kickback statutes, resulting in the filing of false Medicaid and Medicare claims.  A District Court Judge dismissed the matter, finding the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the FCA case because Repko did not qualify as the original source of the information about the alleged FCA violations.  Repko appealed.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In affirming the lower court\u2019s dismissal, the Third Circuit agreed that much of the information on which the alleged FCA case was based had been publicly disclosed before Repko\u2019s\u00a0qui tam\u00a0<\/em>case was filed, through postings on websites and filings in prior litigation.\u00a0 Under the FCA, prior public disclosure is a jurisdictional bar to pursuing a FCA case unless the\u00a0qui tam\u00a0<\/em>relator can show he is the original source of that disclosed information. \u00a0The FCA defines an original source to include one who, prior to a public disclosure, \u201chas voluntarily disclosed to the Government the information on which the allegations or transactions in a claim are based,<\/a>\u201d\u00a0 The appellate court was persuaded by the fact Repko had initially disclosed the challenged arrangements to the government under his plea agreement; the disclosure was bargained-for consideration which enabled Repko to obtain a lower sentence on his bank fraud charges.\u00a0 While never mentioning the word \u201cvoluntarily,\u201d the court found that since the plea agreement compelled his disclosures to the government, Repko was essentially estopped from invoking the original source exception. Without the exception, the public disclosure bar remained applicable and the lower court correctly ruled that it had no subject matter jurisdiction over the FCA action.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The import of the Third Circuit\u2019s opinion may be limited; indeed, the Third Circuit decision is stamped as \u201cnot precedential.\u201d  And while many individual plea agreements do not require disclosure of other unlawful activities, diversion agreements or conditions of probation may contain provisions requiring an individual report suspected illegality.  So if you face a qui tam <\/em>suit brought by an ex-employee who at one time faced criminal charges, and there is a public disclosure issue, some targeted discovery related to the terms of any agreements with government attorneys, and\/or conditions of probation, may be warranted.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In\u00a0U.S. ex rel. Repko v. Guthrie Clinic et al.,\u00a0the Third Circuit recently ended an attempt by Rodney Repko, former general counsel and executive vice president for Guthrie Healthcare System and its related entities, to bring a\u00a0qui tam\u00a0case against his former employer.\u00a0 After he left his job at Guthrie, Repko allegedly attempted to steal two million … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_generate-full-width-content":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4441"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4441"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4441\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4444,"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4441\/revisions\/4444"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.healthlawpolicymatters.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}