Following a jury verdict in favor of an worker, which discovered that Parker-Migliorini Worldwide retaliated in opposition to him for his engagement in protected exercise beneath the False Claims Act when it terminated his employment, the U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the tenth Circuit upheld the district courtroom’s denial of the corporate’s movement for judgment as a matter of regulation.
In April 2012, Brandon Barrick filed a qui tam motion in opposition to his former employer, Parker-Migliorini Worldwide (PMI), which alleged violations of the False Claims Act (FCA), and illegal retaliation within the U.S. District Courtroom for the District of Utah. A jury discovered that PMI retaliated in opposition to Barrick for his engagement in a protected exercise beneath the FCA when it terminated his employment, according to the opinion.
