Matthew Turetzky: Labels Matter, But Not As Much As They Used To
In a new blog post, Sheppard Mullin’s Matthew Turetzky discusses how the labels used to describe a statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirement are still relevant of materiality, in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Escobar. “Before Escobar, some courts held that implied certification cases could survive a motion to dismiss only if the statute, regulation, or contractual provision that was allegedly violated was a ‘condition of payment,’ as opposed to a ‘condition of participation,’” Turetzky writes. “Escobar eliminated the conditions of payment versus conditions of participation distinction, but conceded that the labels used to describe a statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirement were still relevant of materiality.” Turetzky discusses two recent cases in which post-Escobar courts dealt with such labels.
