2009 House Bill 4117 (Authorize triple damages for false monetary claim against state )

[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Rep. Gino Polidori (D) on January 22, 2009, to create a new “false claims” cause of action, in which an individual or the Attorney General could sue a person who performs one of a wide range of actions that constitute a false or fraudulent monetary claim against the state or a local government. A court would be authorized to award triple damages against the perpetrator, and the individual who brought the suit (or the Attorney General’s office) would be eligible to receive a portion of the damages.
- Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on January 22, 2009.
- Reported in the House on March 11, 2009, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the House on March 12, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance of the bill as previously described. The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on March 12, 2009.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Mark Meadows (D) on March 12, 2009, to revise the deadlines for filing a (valid) lawsuit against the state. The amendment passed in the House by voice vote on March 12, 2009.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Tonya Schuitmaker (R) on March 12, 2009, to clarify that a provision authorizing sanctions for shorting the state when delivering "public property" under his or her custody also applies to "money". The amendment passed in the House by voice vote on March 12, 2009.
Passed in the House (107 to 0) on March 12, 2009. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the Senate on March 17, 2009.
- Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 17, 2009.

Most Recent Comments

1) Re: 2009 House Bill 4117 [by bugman on March 23, 2009]

is it the intent of this bill to force criminals to 'make whole' victims 15 times over, then to pay the claimant? we already have laws against theft.

Line

2) Re: 2009 House Bill 4117 [by qui tam on March 23, 2009]

Not exactly---it incentivizes reports of false claims by compensating and protecting those who report and are demoted, ostracized and punished. Contractors being aware of the procedure will, and anecdotally has, deterred fraud. since most if not all false claims/qui tam actions are settled for statutory damages and fines far in excess of the amount "stolen," the government is made whole, to the extent that the funds are recovered, and the whistleblower is still paid a reward that comes, effectively, from the double or triple damages and fines assessed against the "bad" guys. Evidence suggests that the federal government, and most of the states with and Act, have recovered $15 for every dollar it costs to prosecute these cases. Not a bad deal?

Line

3) Re: 2009 House Bill 4117 [by bugman on March 23, 2009]

offering a claimant a 'piece of the action' disincentivizes false claims how?

Line

View Full Conversation