A Fair Competition Theory of the Civil False Claims Act

On December 4, 2015, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Universal Health Services v. United States ex rel. Escobar, a fraud case that may reshape the future of $1.9 billion of annual healthcare fraud recoveries in the United States. Julio Escobar and Carmen Correa lost their daughter to a seizure while she was under the care of Universal Health Services.  Escobar and Correa subsequently learned that the staff caring for their daughter were not licensed or certified.  They filed a whistleblower action under the False Claims Act alleging that Universal Health had defrauded the government, which had paid for their daughter’s medical care.  Federal courts have expressed uncertainty as to whether Universal Health’s behavior legally constitutes fraud.  For example, one court has held that lying about a supervising physician’s credentials does not constitute fraud, while another court has held that lying about a physician provider does constitute fraud under the statute.  The Supreme Court’s decision may help clarify the presently convoluted fraud analysis.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments closed

Disability Discrimination in the Form of Ad Hoc Examinations

Disability Discrimination in the Form of Ad Hoc Examinations

Thomas E. Simmons*
* Thomas E. Simmons is an assistant professor at the University of South Dakota School of Law.

ABSTRACT

The 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), alongside the Nebraska Fair Employment Practice Act (FEPA), prohibit discrimination against employees on the basis of disability. One of the lesser examined provisions of the twin acts presumes that employer-mandated medical examinations of individuals with disabilities amount to unlawful discrimination unless the employer can demonstrate a business necessity. The precise elements of a business necessity defense were articulated and explicated by the Nebraska Supreme Court in the recently decided case of Arens v. NEBCO, Inc.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments closed

Disability Discrimination in the Form of Ad Hoc Examinations: A Brief Introduction

Nearly every Employment Law casebook, course, and lecture includes at least some mention of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  In addition to the ADA, the Nebraska Fair Employment Practice Act prohibits discrimination in the workplace.  Under either Act, an employer-mandated medical examination of an individual with disabilities is presumed to be unlawful discrimination.  Thomas E. Simmons, an associate professor at the University of South Dakota School of Law, examines the business necessity defense available to rebut this presumption as articulated by the Nebraska Supreme Court in Arens v. NEBCO, Inc.  Professor Simmons’ article may be found here and directly linked to from the Bulletin.  The Bulletin welcomes any response, counter or commentary which may be forwarded to the Online Editor, Briana Hildebrand, at bhildebrand@huskers.unl.edu.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments closed

The Fifth Judge: Thompson v. Heineman and Nebraska’s Judicial Supermajority Clause

The Fifth Judge:

Thompson v. Heineman and Nebraska’s Judicial Supermajority Clause

Kathleen Miller, University of Nebraska College of Law

J.D. Candidate, 2016

 

Introduction: History of the Case

 

When TransCanada proposed its Keystone XL route in 2008, it likely did not believe that the proposal would face much opposition.  After all, TransCanada already had another pipeline running through Nebraska.  The thought that the project would be at a standstill seven years later seemed unfathomable.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments closed

Keystone XL and Nebraska’s Judicial Supermajority Clause: A Brief Introduction

Many are familiar with the Keystone XL due to the political controversy surrounding the pipeline.  Of central relevance to Nebraska, it is difficult to open a newspaper, scroll through a Twitter feed, or discuss environmental issues without the topic rising to the forefront of conversation.  However, what many people are unaware of is Nebraska’s judicial supermajority clause.  This affects not only LB 1161, which changed the pipeline permitting process in Nebraska, but any state statute challenged on constitutional grounds.  Kathleen Miller, J.D. Candidate, 2016, offers insight into this often forgotten area of particular peculiarity in Nebraska and its effect on Keystone XL.  Katie’s article,  may be found here and directly linked to from the Bulletin.  The Bulletin welcomes any response, counter or commentary which may be forwarded to the Online Editor, Briana Hildebrand, at bhildebrand@huskers.unl.edu.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments closed

2015 Nebraska Law Review Write-On Competition

This post contains materials for the 2015 University of Nebraska College of Law annual write-on competition.

This competition is open to UNL Law students who have completed their 1L year or are a transfer student, and have two (2) or more remaining (non-summer) semesters left. Further instructions are available in the attached materials.

If you have any questions, please contact Amy Peters, Research Editor, at amy.peters@huskers.unl.edu.

Best of luck!

Materials for 2015 Write-On Competition

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments closed

The Nebraska Law Review Joins Twitter

In an effort to increase its online presence, the Nebraska Law Review, has joined the twitter community.  Please follow the Review @NebLRev for helpful information and updates regarding Nebraska and 8th Circuit issues.

Any comments or questions may be directed to Briana Hildebrand, the Online Editor, at bhildebrand@huskers.unl.edu.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments closed

2014 Nebraska Law Review Write-On Competition

This post contains materials for the 2014 University of Nebraska College of Law annual write-on competition.

This competition is open to UNL Law students who have completed their 1L year or are a transfer student, and have two (2) or more remaining (non-summer) semesters left. Further instructions are available in the attached materials.

If you have any questions, please contact Sarah Hindman, Research Editor, at sarahnhindman@gmail.com.

Best of luck!

Materials for 2014 Write-On Competition

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments closed

Regulators, Mount Up

Ben Trachtenberg[0]

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Improving Law School “Transparency”

Jeffrey Evans Stake[0]

Given their central role in the training and socialization of lawyers, law schools are uniquely obliged to present themselves honestly to the public and to their prospective students. In recent years, law schools have failed to live up to that simple standard. As Ben Trachtenberg documents in detail,[1] some law schools have lied or deliberately presented misleading information. More broadly, all law schools have followed the ABA mandate to report employment statistics that, until recently, were defined in ways that would have surprised many law school applicants. The ABA has taken steps to improve the flow of information from law schools to the public. It has punished perpetrators and reformed reporting rules. What more should be done?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment