Whistleblower Watch

Whistleblower Watch

Reports and Analysis of Developments in Whistleblower Law

Sarah Hill

Sarah Hill

Sarah A. Hill is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office, where she practices in the Government Contracts and Product Liability & Torts groups. Sarah represents government contractors in both litigation and counseling matters. Her practice focuses on civil and criminal fraud under the False Claims Act (FCA), compliance and regulatory issues, and government contracts due diligence. Sarah has experience representing clients with respect to both internal and government investigations. She also represents government contractors in bid protests before the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Court of Federal Claims.

Read Sarah's bio on Crowell & Moring's website

Subscribe to all posts by Sarah Hill

Should Loose Lips Sink Whistleblower FCA Suits?

Posted in False Claims Act (FCA), Uncategorized
For the third consecutive term, the Supreme Court will decide a case involving the False Claims Act (“FCA”). On November 1, 2016, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in State Farm and Casualty Co. v. United States ex rel. Rigsby on the question of what standard should govern the decision whether to dismiss a whistleblower’s claim… Continue Reading

High Court Recognizes FCA Liability Based on Implied Certification

Posted in False Claims Act (FCA)
Last week in Universal Health Servs. v. U.S. ex rel. Escobar, the Supreme Court recognized the implied certification theory of FCA liability, subject to “rigorous” and “demanding” application of the scienter and materiality standards.  The Court unanimously held that a defendant may be liable under the FCA when, in connection with a claim for payment… Continue Reading

Supreme Court Hears Arguments on FCA Implied Certification Theory

Posted in False Claims Act (FCA)
The Supreme Court heard arguments today in Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, a False Claims Act (FCA) case with potentially far-reaching consequences for whistleblowers, healthcare providers, government contractors, and all companies and institutions that receive federal dollars.  There are two questions before the Court: (1) whether the “implied certification” theory… Continue Reading