Partner Douglas Rosenblum will be co-presenting “The Ethics of Simultaneous Representation: When Have I Waded Too Far into Pool Counsel Waters?” at the 2024 White Collar Practice Seminar hosted by the Pennsylvania Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Doug’s panel will take place on Thursday, November 14, 2024. This presentation will cover how to conduct initial meetings with prospective clients, identify conflicts, make disclosures, obtain informed consent and waivers, insight into the advantages and disadvantages of joining a pool, the ethical risks involved in multiple representations, the effectiveness of advance waivers and what can happen if your pool counsel representation is challenged in court.
This two-day program, on November 14 and 15, will cover topics such as Recent Developments and Hot Topics in SEC Enforcement Practice, Lessons from High-Profile Acquittal of Former Autonomy CEO, Recent Developments in the Enforcement of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and many more.
There is still time to register here. Read More
Partner Tim Hazel will be presenting a 3-hour Pennsylvania CE course on Real Estate Licensee/NAR Ethics for a local commercial real estate office. Taking place on November 6, this course will focus on the Code of Ethics established by the National Association of REALTORS®. Students will examine specifically developed commercial content about: the aspirational concepts in the Preamble of the Code of Ethics, the concept of general business ethics and how it compares and contrasts with the duties in the REALTORS® Code of Ethics and how professional standards are enforced by associations of REALTORS®.
Read More
In recent years, some recoveries from whistleblowers’ private claims (which are not shared with the government) have dwarfed the typical relator share, the portion of the government’s settlement or jury verdict paid to successful whistleblowers. The prevalence of corporations, their executives, and/or associates as whistleblowers, have increased the potential damages for conventional retaliation claims pursuant to 3730(h) and various state analogs.
Creativity in representing whistleblowers has also woven clear and expansive federal and state whistleblower protections with state-based statutory and tort claims, resulting in a strong, yet elastic fabric for significant, even eight-figure recoveries by injured whistleblowers. In 2023, the Department of Justice (DOJ) recovered a total of $2.3 billion in settlements and judgments from FCA lawsuits filed by whistleblowers, for which the government paid $349 million to the whistleblowers who exposed the fraud.1 However, the average relator share received by whistleblowers the year before was just over $748,000.2 Whistleblowers are often also victims of retaliation and other injuries related to their refusal to participate in fraud. When filing qui tam actions on behalf of the government, whistleblowers are increasingly pursuing a wide range of private causes of action in the same lawsuit, filed under seal.
These private causes of action by whistleblowers can result in recoveries that far exceed the average relator share. However, most defendants do not take the opportunity to resolve private causes of action in advance of the settlement with the government. In treating these private causes of action as an afterthought, defendants lose an opportunity to resolve substantial claims early and are likely exposing themselves to significant damage awards based on egregious conduct meted out against these whistleblowing heroes.
Same Conduct – Different Victims with Distinct Claims and Damages
The same conduct that feeds a FCA case brought for damages to government payors also acts as an accelerant to significant claims and substantial recoveries by whistleblowers. Read More
The Physician Payments Sunshine Act (PPSA) took effect in 2013. It requires medical product manufacturers to disclose to the CMS payments or transfers of value made to physicians or teaching hospitals including meals, travel reimbursement, and consulting fees.1 Payments related to research are reported through a separate reporting system.2 The act also requires manufacturers and group purchasing organizations to disclose any physician’s ownership or financial interest in those companies.3
The Process
Data about payments made to covered recipients is collected by reporting entities throughout the year. Data collected during the previous calendar year is submitted to CMS between February 1 and March 31 each year. Covered recipients may review and dispute the data from April 1 until May 15. Reporting entities resolve disputes and correct data from April 1 until May 30. The disclosed data is published by CMS in a publicly searchable database by June 30th each year.4 The search tool currently has data from January 2016 until December 31, 2022. The 2023 data will be published on June 30, 2024. Between 2016 and 2022, $68.42 billion dollars have been reported through Open Payments.
Penalties
Penalties for failure to comply with the act are broken down into two main categories: violation of the PPSA and knowing violation of the PPSA. The penalties as adjusted annually pursuant to 45 CFR §102. Currently, violations of the PPSA are subject to a civil money penalty of not less than $1,362, but not more than $13,625, for each payment or other transfer of value or ownership or investment interest not reported as required under the act. The total amount of civil monetary penalties imposed under this subsection is limited to $204,384.5
Knowing violations are currently penalized at not less than $13,625, but not more than $136,258, for each payment or other transfer of value or ownership or investment interest not reported. Read More
On June 27, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the scope of the government’s burden of proof of a defendant’s mental state, or mens rea. The Supreme Court held that in a statute that provided an exception or exemption to prosecution, that is a clause stating “except as authorized,” the government must now prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant knew that he did not fall within the scope of that exception. Although the case related to a federal criminal statute prohibiting the dispensing or distribution of controlled substances by a physician, the ruling can be applied to myriad criminal statutes that carve out exceptions or exemptions to prosecution. This article explains the Supreme Court’s decision and focuses on the ramifications as it pertains to other criminal statutes. It also raises questions regarding the reasonableness standards of the exclusionary rule under United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984).
In Ruan v. United States, 597 U.S. (2022), two physicians in two distinct cases were convicted of dispensing or distributing controlled substances by issuing opioid prescriptions in violation of 21 U.S.C. Section 841(a). Section 841 makes it a federal crime “except as authorized, … for any person knowingly or intentionally … to manufacture, distribute, or dispense … a controlled substance.” The Supreme Court consolidated the cases for purposes of the opinion. The defendants asserted that they were authorized to issue the prescriptions under 21 CFR Section 1306(a)(2021), which allows physicians to write prescriptions for controlled substances only “for a legitimate medical purpose … acting in the usual course of his professional practice.” They further asserted that even if they failed to comply with such standard, they believed they did. In other words, they asserted a good faith defense. The government in both trials argued that the prescriptions issued by the defendants did not comply with the standards set forth in 21 CFR Section 1306(a). Read More
Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP is pleased to be recognized by Chambers USA in its 2021 guide in the area of Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations in Pennsylvania. Chambers ranks leading law firms and attorneys across the U.S. based on the opinion of their clients and peers, and by the quality of their work.
Chambers USA acknowledges that the team has experience “handling actions brought under the False Claims Act and tackling significant cross-border mandates.” Clients and peers are quoted as saying, “Pietragallo Gordon has an excellent securities and white-collar practice” and as having “a good statewide footprint.”
Additionally, the following partners are ranked:
William Pietragallo— Litigation: General Commercial— Pennsylvania: Pittsburgh & Surrounds
Marc S. Raspanti— Litigation: White Collar Crime & Government Investigations— Pennsylvania Read More
The Pennsylvania Bar Institute will be holding it’s next Cyberlaw Update program on April 27, 2020 in Pittsburgh. During this program, attendees will discuss: experiences with new state and EU regulations on privacy, current security dangers and data breach responses, the impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI), cloud and other technologies in business, electronic communication and its impact on litigation and discovery, and ethical challenges with social media and the ever-changing social technology environment.
Pietragallo Partner Chris A. Iacono is faculty of the program. He will co-present during a Cyber and Litigation segment titled, “Responding to Data Breaches: Legal Updates and Practical Counsel.”
THIS EVENT HAS BEEN POSTPONED. PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FIRM NEWSLETTER FOR ALERTS AND UPDATES.
Read More
As Veterans’ Day neared, Pietragallo attorney Paul K. Vey shared the following for all members of our Team:
One of many — a remembrance for Veterans Day
Roughly 78 years ago, a high school senior from Bellevue PA, just outside of Pittsburgh, learned that the United States had been attacked and was entering World War II. He wanted to join the war effort immediately but his parents insisted that he finish high school.
He graduated from high school that spring and enlisted in the Army Air Corps, the predecessor of the United States Air Force. Although he wasn’t a great student, he desperately wanted to fly. He managed to show enough promise that he was sent to flight school in Lafayette Louisiana, where after a rigorous, but incredibly short training period, became the captain of a B-24 Liberator bomber at age 18, and responsible for a 10 man crew.
The bomber group to which he was assigned was called upon to support the Italian campaign in Europe where he and his crew managed to stay airborne through almost 50 bombing raids. Just as he and his crew were about to be sent to England for rest and recuperation, his orders were changed and his bomber group was dispatched to India to support the Allied effort to drive the Japanese from Southeast Asia. It was now 1943.
On what turned out to be his last mission, he and his crew were part of a three bomber mission to destroy a rail line in Burma, now known as Myanmar. The approach to the target was a low altitude approach to increase the likelihood of surprise. His aircraft was the first to the target. Almost immediately upon releasing his bomb load, the plane was struck by ground fire starting a fire in two engines and dramatically reducing the power from a third. Read More
October 21, 2024
Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP is pleased to announce the addition of three new associates to the firm’s Pittsburgh and Philadelphia Offices. Read More
May 17, 2024
Pietragallo is pleased to announce that 24 lawyers have been named to the 2024 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers and Rising Stars list. Read More