Qui Tam

The phrase "qui tam" may be unfamiliar to you, but if you ever find yourself in a "whistleblower" capacity, it will have great meaning.

"Qui tam" is actually short for "Qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso". In Latin, the phrase roughly translates to "Who sues on behalf of the King, as well as for himself."

Qui tam laws allow a person to sue on behalf of the government and, consequently, recover a percentage of any monetary awards that are given as a result of the lawsuit. It's a part of the United State's False Claims Act.

A qui tam lawsuit is shrouded in a bit of mystery. When a qui tam relator (the person who acts as the "whistleblower" against a company that may be defrauding the government) files a civil lawsuit in federal court, the claim is sealed. Therefore, allegations can be investigated without the defendant knowing.

After a qui tam lawsuit filing, the government has about two months to determine if it feels there is enough evidence to proceed with a case of fraud against the defendant. Not surprisingly, the government often discovers that the timeframe is not long enough to determine whether a case has merit; therefore, it may extend the timeframe to several years, pending the results of preliminary investigation. During this time, the lawsuit is still sealed and the defendant still is unaware that it is being scrutinized for illegal activity.

If the government decides the qui tam lawsuit does not merit its assistance, the government will decline to proceed with the case. At this point, the whistleblower can continue without the government, though it's often difficult (but not impossible) to win a case without the government on his or her side.

If the government agrees with the plaintiff that the qui tam case should be prosecuted, it will contact the defendant. Many times, the defendant agrees to some kind of settlement prior to any records being unsealed; therefore, the public may never become aware of the qui tam lawsuit and its settlement results.

The qui tam relator receives a percentage of any monetary settlement as a reward for blowing the whistle on illegal activity. That percentage varies, though it's usually more than 15% and may be significantly higher. The qui tam relator's attorney will then receive his or her fees as an extra part of the settlement so the relator does not have to pay for legal services out of pocket.

If you have information on government fraud or other illegal activities, please contact our office today. Together, we can determine if the evidence supports a qui tam lawsuit filing.

Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Comments:
	.
	Please enter the security code (characters in this image) into the field below for security purposes
Security Code:

Whistleblower/False Claims News

News of whistleblowers from towns that are both modestly-populated and downright enormous hit the papers, business and entertainment magazines, and general Internet headlines every day. This is exactly what happened in the case of David Welch, the former chief executive officer of Cardinal Bankshares Corporation. Cardinal became a small bank with a big problem when Welch started questioning the accounting practices of the bank and "blew the whistle" on some goings-on.

What happened next was something that, unfortunately, often occurs when whistleblowers shed light on their employers' illegal activities - Welch was terminated from his position. The Department of Labor's Administrative Review Board called the termination an act of retaliation and on June 9, 2006, ordered that Welch be reinstated to his position as CEO.

Though as of early July 2006 Welch had still not been placed back on the payroll (Cardinal is trying to get around the order through legal means), it's a win for whistleblowers everywhere. This is because after the huge Enron blowup and exposure of illegal activities hit the press, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was passed in 2002. SOX gives whistleblowers the right to return to their workplaces without fear of retaliation.

Of course, human nature being what it is, SOX cannot prevent harassment, termination, or accusations from occurring; what it can and does do is provide whistleblowers with a legal way to attack their employers who are retaliating against them.

The Cardinal v. Welch decision makes Welch the first person to win under SOX, an exciting prospect for others who are on the fence as to whether they should "blow the whistle" on their employers' fraudulent or questionable activities.

The hope is that the Welch case encourages other persons to come forward. Additionally, it sends a strong message to employers that they cannot make whistleblowers' lives miserable as an act of retaliation.

At our law firm, we are greatly encouraged by the results of this case. All along, we have urged employees to become whistleblowers; now, those who do are given an added measure of legal protection against reprisal.

If you have witnessed or heard of potentially illegal activities or government fraud occurring at your place of employment, please contact our office today. We'll provide you with a free, no-obligation consultation with one of our professional legal team members to determine the best way for you to proceed. Together, we'll send a message to employers that fraud will be punished.

Whistleblower Statistics

A so-called "whistleblower" is someone who provides the government with evidence against his or her employer's illegal activities. The employer, if found guilty of the alleged crimes, is then charged, and the whistleblower may receive a percentage of the money that the company must repay.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), Civil Division, keeps whistleblower statistics to track of all the whistleblower activity that relates to fraud. Below are some of the more interesting whistleblower statistics from various years between 1986-2005:

(Note: The term "qui tam" refers to a claim filed against an employer by the whistleblower who has been retaliated against due to his "whistle blowing". Retaliations such as employer-on-employee harassment, intimidation, and/or termination are illegal, not to mention unethical, and often result in claimants receiving sums of money as restitution for the reprehensible treatment they received.)

Whistleblower Statistics Fact #1:
In 1987, the total whistleblower settlements and judgments (both qui tam and non qui tam) equaled a little over $27 million. However, by the year 2005, that number had shot up to over $112 million.

Whistleblower Statistics Fact #2:
The number of non qui tam matters dropped dramatically from 245 in 1987 to 13 in 2005. During this same period, the number of qui tam matters rose from 18 to 97.

Whistleblower Statistics Fact #3:
In 1987, there were no reported qui tam settlements or judgments. Ten years later, there were over $52 million dollars worth.

Whistleblower Statistics Fact #4:
In 1988, whistleblowers received about 25% of the qui tam settlements and judgments. In 2004, they only received about 12%.

Whistleblower Statistics Fact #5:
By 2005, less than twenty years after the DOD began tracking these types of cases, the total amount of non qui tam and qui tam settlements and judgments was over $3.2 billion.

One of the most remarkable aspects of the above whistleblower statistics is how much money companies have tried to basically steal from the government (aka, you and me.) This leads many to wonder how many more dollars are lost every year as more and more corporations try to boost their bottom lines illegally.

Because our law firm is deeply committed to bringing all persons and companies to justice, we encourage you to call us if you have information on improper activities occurring. A phone call or email is free, as is a consultation to discuss your knowledge and situation. Please contact us today.

Whistleblower Statutes of Limitations

Did you discover that the company you work for has committed government fraud or some other kind of illegal activity? As a result, did you "blow the whistle" on your employer... only to receive treatment that you consider to be retaliatory against you, such as harassment? If so, you need to act quickly by filing a claim (as under the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002), because the whistleblower statutes of limitations can be as short as 90 days.

What are whistleblower statutes of limitations, you ask? They are the time limits set by federal or state governments wherein the "whistleblower" can make a claim against a retaliatory employer. Whistleblower statutes of limitations are, as stated above, usually fairly short; thus, action should be taken swiftly or the opportunity for remuneration might pass.

For instance, when employees "blow the whistle" on their company's fraudulent activities, they are not always welcomed back by their employer. In fact, most are treated like pariahs - sometimes, they are simply treated abusively in a verbal manner; other times, they are fired for mysterious reasons.

These whistleblowers are often caught off-guard by this kind of treatment by their employers. Even though they made a claim against the company, they didn't expect to be treated badly as a result. However, we're taught from the playground that being a "snitch" is a bad thing, though in reality, it's very important.

Consider the case of Enron. Without whistleblowers, Enron's top executives would still be defrauding the government (i.e., "we the people") out of billions of dollars. That's unacceptable.

What is just as unacceptable is treatment of "whistleblowers" that is in any way criminal. However, as mentioned above, there are plenty of whistleblower statutes of limitations and those whistleblower statutes of limitations vary in length. Therefore, it's important to make a claim before the whistleblower statutes of limitations runs out in your case.

To learn more about whistleblower statutes of limitations, we encourage you to contact our team of legal professionals today. A consultation is free, and you'll be under no obligation to file a claim, though we do ask that if you're within the whistleblower statutes of limitations you consider doing so. (Otherwise, those causing you harm will be victors, which is unfair and reprehensible.) Together, we'll be able to ensure that you are treated safely, and that you get any monetary compensation you deserve for the illegal treatment you received.