When the Ends Do Not Justify the Means: The Application of Statistical Sampling to Determine Liability in False Claims Act Cases

Authors

Christina Vlahos

Document Type

Note

Abstract

(Excerpt)

Thus, this Note argues that the use of statistical sampling to determine liability in False Claims Act cases constitutes a violation of a defendant’s constitutional right to Due Process under the Fifth Amendment. Part I of this Note provides some historical context for the False Claims Act and discusses its contemporary application as a tool for the federal government to recover funds that were disbursed to fraudulent claimants. Part II examines earlier False Claims Act cases in which statistical sampling was assessed as a tool for evidentiary analysis. It also examines a recent False Claims Act trial in which the presiding judge held that extrapolation for a statistical sample was sufficient to prove liability, notwithstanding many years of precedent holding otherwise. Part III argues that, on balance, even though the federal government has a strong interest in enforcing the False Claims Act and recovering government funds, statistical sampling fails to provide adequate procedural due process to defendants. This methodology deprives defendants of their Seventh Amendment rights, fails to adhere to civil litigation pleading requirements, and defies accepted standards of proof for liability.