CaliforniaKO Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 ALLCON: Does anyone have thoughts about the Circle C case out of the M.D. of Tenn. wherein the court held liable under the False Claim Act (qui tam) an Army prime contract that submitted false certifications that its employees and its sub-contractor employees had been paid prevailing wages as required by the Davis Bacon Act? See U.S. ex rel. Wall v. Circle Construction, LLC, No. 3:07-0091, Document 107, US Dist. Ct. Judge Haynes (entered 3/15/2010). Is this the trend? Instead of disgruntled workers seeking their remedy through the Dept. of Labor, are we going to see these matters wind up as qui tam cases under the False Claims Act. CaliforniaKO (CaliforniaKO@gmail.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif)
Recommended Posts