Supreme Court Appears Likely to Side with Whistleblowers in Time Limit Case

4514 Cole Ave, #600 | Dallas, Texas 75205

Call Kardell Law Group 214-306-8045

Parsons Corp, a government contractor, is alleged to have increased its wealth by tricking a legally blind official. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court appears likely to side against the contractor in a case that hinges on how much time whistleblowers have to file a claim.

The law gives seemingly contradictory time windows in which whistleblowers may file a lawsuit. One sets a six-year window that opens up immediately after the alleged violation, while another provision allows suits to be filed within three years after the federal government first learns of the fraud. The latter provision also has a cap preventing claims from being filed more than 10 years after the alleged fraudulent incident occurred.

Background of the case

The suit was brought in 2013 in reference to a contract that had been designed to clean up munitions left by retreating forces during the Iraq war. Parsons Corp. won the contract and hired Cochise Consultancy for security. The whistleblower, Billy Joe Hunt, claims Cochise bribed an official in the government to give them the security services portion of the contract, after the security had initially been contracted to a different company that offered its services cheaper.

According to Hunt, that person put a forged document in front of a legally blind federal official, not telling him it would rescind the contract award the government had given to that other company and give it to Cochise instead.

The government declined to intervene at first, and the District Court tossed out the suit, saying it had passed its statute of limitations, but the 11^th Circuit found the matter to be less open-and-shut, and the question then became whether the federal government must intervene in the lawsuit for the statute of limitations to start ticking.

It remains to be seen how the Supreme Court will rule in the case, but its decision could have wide-reaching implications for the field of whistleblower law.

For more information and guidance on how to proceed with a whistleblower claim, meet with a knowledgeable attorney at Kardell Law Group.

By Steve Kardell | Published May 2, 2019 | Posted in Whistleblower Litigation | Tagged contradictory time windows, knowledgeable attorney, Time Limit Case, whistleblower, whistleblower claim

Awards & Honors

Our Office

Dallas Office
4514 Cole Ave
#600
Dallas, Texas 75205
Phone: 214-306-8045
Fax: 469-729-9926

Testimonials

"Steve Kardell was terrific in representing me in some very adversarial discussions with Citigroup and also later represented me in my testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission." -Richard Bowen, Citigroup Whistleblower
"Incredible knowledge of employee related concerns and equally brilliant knowledge of health care regulations, standards of practice. I would recommend this firm to anyone." -V.B.
"Reaching out to Steve Kardell was the best decision I made. His ability to provide immediate insight and direction was very powerful, and a huge relief during a very stressful time period. For anyone struggling with a whistleblower situation, I would highly recommend at least speaking with Steve. After a 10 minute call with him, I had a better understanding of what I was dealing with. Even better, he gave me some immediate hope. In the end Steve did a better job than I thought was possible. Steve was able to get in contact with people in my organization, that I didn’t have access to. Because of his years of experience, he already has contacts in many organizations in Dallas. The entire situation was handled peacefully. I was impressed by his ability to “keep the peace”–rather than creating a battle with the organization. The reason I didn’t reach out to a lawyer initially, was because I thought it would mean an immediate end to any hope of a positive relationship with the company. Steve was able to address my concerns, and in the end I was able to continue to work for them." -KS
"Never thought my career would end like it did after 30 years of service. I was part of the first round of the so called reduction of force. I asked myself how can I be part of this with 30 years of seniority. How did they pick these 90 plus employees? Now, the culture of this organization made you question every decision they made. It wasn’t what you knew it’s was a culture of who you know. Nonetheless, I did not accept their severance package. I immediately starting looking for an attorney who would take on my case. After the initial call to Steve I had hope again. He was open and honest about everything and reassured me he would do his best for me, and he did. I had an awesome outcome. Thanks Steve you’re the best." -S.S.