The Qui Tam Blog

A lawsuit was filed Monday, July 19th by Wilfrido Willie Mata, the former IT director of the Harrison County sheriff’s office’s claiming he was illegally fired for being a whistle blower.

“You can’t say to somebody, ‘Thanks for reporting. You’re fired,’” Houston whistleblower attorney Joel Androphy said.

According to the lawsuit, instead of looking the other way while an outsider hacked into the county’s computer system, Mata went to the FBI. In October, Mata disclosed his cooperation to the sheriff’s office. In February, the suit says his performance review was rated average. In May, he was fired.

“That timing is too close to not raise a lot of suspicion that he was fired because of complaining,” Androphy said. The lawsuit alleges the sheriff’s office violated the Whistleblower Act.

Watch the complete story as reported on WKTRK Eyewitness News.

Who is liable for man-made disasters such as the oil spill? Just the primary corporation, like BP, or also the suppliers of their equipment and parts? See what Geoff Berg has to say in this article:

Cameron Provided Blowout Gear for Rig That Sank
“I don’t think it could possibly be much more serious than a severe incident like this,” Geoff Berg, a partner at the Houston law firm Berg & Androphy, said today in a telephone interview. “If there is some evidence of liability, then you can bet that everyone will and should be sued over it.” Read More

$176,000 was just paid to qui tam whistleblower who filed a lawsuit against Cochlear Americas on behalf of the federal government. Whistleblower Brenda March filed the lawsuit as the company allegedly paid illegal remuneration to health care providers as an incentive to sell Cochlear devices.

The total settlement with Cochlear Americas was worth $880,000. The defendant company is a subsidiary of the Australian company Cochlear Limited.

March originally filed using provision in the Anti-Kickback Act and False Claims Act, saying that the company was clearly paying kickbacks to physicians who sold Cochlear devices to Medicare and Medicaid patients.

Signed into law on March 23, 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “Affordable Care Act”) narrowed the bar against bringing suits based on public disclosure by restricting the public disclosure bar to only information publically disclosed at the Federal level – not at the State or Local level.

The Affordable Care Act, however, broadened the definition of an “original source” to include, not only a relator with direct and independent knowledge of the information on which the allegations were based and that voluntarily provided that information to the government before filing suit, but also a relator who provides knowledge to the government before filing suit that is “independent of and materially adds to the publically disclosed allegations or transactions.”

The Affordable Care Act amends the Anti-Kickback Statute to provide that items or services resulting from an Anti-Kickback Statue violation are false for purposes of the FCA, disposing of the need to rely on a false certification theory of FCA liability.

Additionally, the Affordable Care Act settles the circuit split regarding the definition of “willfulness” in the Anti-Kickback Statute. Some courts required the government to prove that a defendant knew that the Anti-Kickback Statute prohibited the conduct at issue, while other courts disagreed. The new law, however, makes it clear that the Anti-Kickback Statute does not require the government to prove actual knowledge of a “known legal duty” that was being violated.

ABC News Houston keeps qui tam attorney Joel Androphy on call when they need a legal expert. Here, Androphy shares his thoughts of the context of a local courtroom situation and how it may affect the jury’s decision. Read about the case, the trial, and what Androphy has to say in the article below.

Suspect’s Brother Kicked Out of Court During Testimony of Accused Cop Killer’s Trial
The trial of a man accused of killing a Houston police officer entered its second day of testimony, but Tuesday the biggest drama came when one of the suspect’s family members was asked to leave the courtroom. Read More

New financial reform legislation before Congress would allow an increase in multi-million dollar awards to whistleblowers. Ideally, this would create an environment where companies are pressured to report misconduct earlier and where whistleblowers will see the reward in bringing fraudulent activities to light.

Under the new law, the Securities and Exchange Commission would be required to award whistleblowers 30 percent of the total retribution or settlement gained from prosecution of the fraudulent company.

The False Claims Act had similar goals, although without the minimum reward requirement that would offer whisteblowers and lucrative and tangible incentive to report their company’s wrongdoings. Many experts agree that this type of incentive would go a long way toward convincing wary potential-whistleblowers who are afraid of losing their jobs or facing similar retaliation from the company they report. With significant financial incentive, blowing the whistle on misconduct gets a little easier.

Learn how the qui tam attorneys at Berg & Androphy have recovered hundreds of millions for the government and whistleblowers.

How much is Hurricane Ike’s cleanup really costing the taxpayer? It turns out that that costs may be more than you think for reasons that may surprise you. Joel Androphy weighs in on two examples “suspcicious” money trails following Hurricane Ike. See what he says about the following ABC News investigations that are currently underway.

Following the Money Trail After Ike
“It’s very suspicious. The circumstances,” said KTRK Legal Analyst Joel Androphy. Read More

Are Your Tax Dollars Paying for a Family Affair in Chambers and Liberty Counties?
“If the public has a right to bid on a contract, everyone has a right to bid. Number one, it’s fair. It gets the government the best price. And it gives everyone an opportunity to compete,” Androphy said. Read More

In an attempt to speed up civil fraud investigations in the U.S., Attorney General Eric Holder expanded the power of the False Claims Act by signing an order allowing U.S. Attorneys to issue civil investigative demands under the Act.

Civil investigative demand allows for a subpoena of documents, depositions and interrogatories. Currently the Justice Department can issue these investigative demands before it files a complaint or before signing on to qui tam litigation. This makes the information accessible before the potential defendant can conduct its own discovery.

Until this year, the Attorney General could exclusively approve civil investigative demands. Because of this limitation, they were not common. Last spring, however, an anti-fraud bill made its way through congress and subsequently established the practice of allowing the Attorney General to delegate the power to Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division. In a further expansion, Attorney General Holder also allowed Assistant Attorney General Tony West to redelegatee such powers to U.S. Attorneys, with notice and reporting requirement.

Last month, ABC News consulted attorney Joel Androphy on the costs that Toyota will be facing, following the significant number of car malfunctions that have left Toyota drivers injured, scared and distraught. See what he has to say in this article about a legal case involving an injured Toyota driver who experienced sudden acceleration and accident.

Local family files lawsuit against Toyota
…”Toyota is going to have to set aside billions and billions of dollars in order to compensate consumers, not only from just traffic accidents but everything from the value of the car to fender benders to people’s emotional damages,” said KTRK Legal Analyst Joel Androphy. Read More