Syllabus
Note: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
UNITED STATES ET AL. EX REL. SCHUTTE ET AL. v. SUPERVALU INC. ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 21–1326. Argued April 18, 2023—Decided June 1, 2023[1]
In these cases, petitioners have sued retail pharmacies under the False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U. S. C. §3729 et seq. The FCA permits private parties to bring lawsuits in the name of the United States against those who they believe have defrauded the Federal Government, §3730(b), and imposes liability on anyone who “knowingly” submits a “false” claim to the Government, §3729(a). Here, petitioners claim that respondents—SuperValu and Safeway—defrauded two federal benefits programs, Medicaid and Medicare. Both Medicaid and Medicare offer prescription-drug coverage to their beneficiaries, and both often cap any reimbursement for drugs at the pharmacy’s “usual and customary” charge to the public. But, according to petitioners, SuperValu and Safeway for years offered various pharmacy discount programs to their customers—yet reported their higher retail prices, rather than their discounted prices. Petitioners also presented evidence that the companies believed their discounted prices were their usual and customary prices and tried to prevent regulators and contractors from finding out about their discounted prices. In sum, petitioners claim that the evidence shows that respondents thought their claims were inaccurate yet submitted them anyway.
- ↑ Together with No. 22–111, United States et al. ex rel. Proctor v. Safeway, Inc., also on certiorari to the same court.
