Document Type



Washington and Lee Law Review




The qui tam provision of the Civil False Claims Act effectively serves to expand the government’s capacity to combat fraud, but also invites abusive prosecution against blameless public contractors. Although the public disclosure jurisdictional bar is designed to permit worthy claimants to proceed as whistle blowers while precluding parasitic opportunists from unfairly imposing litigation costs and reaping undeserved awards, the inconsistent judicial interpretation of the original source exception threatens predictable and just law enforcement. Christopher Alexion’s note categorizes the approaches courts have taken as ranging from permissive, to “middle ground” to restrictive based on the timing of the relator’s disclosure, the content of the relator’s disclosure, and the recipient of the relator’s disclosure. This comment examines whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act reforms to this exception will bring uniformity to the qui tam law.