Court Holds Defendant’s Interpretation of Ambiguous Regulation Need Not Be “Most Reasonable’ Interpretation
The McDermott Will & Emery law firm authored an excellent blog post concerning the United States ex rel. Donegan v. Anesthesia Associates of Kansas City, PC case. Although a civil false claims case, the Donegan holding makes clear that civil prosecutors cannot create liability where individuals or companies reasonably interpret government regulations. The Donegan case is also important because it reaffirms a basic principle of law that individuals and corporations can arrange their affairs in an economically advantageous way, so long as that arrangement does not violate any statue or regulation. The principle has even more force in a criminal case.