The New Jersey False Claims Act: A Decade of Data Reveal $147M Recovered by the Garden State
Takeaway: Based on data reported by the State Attorney General, New Jersey’s False Claims Act (NJFCA) has been a legislative success. Between 2010 and 2019, the State netted $147 million under the NJFCA, while relators received $8.8 million. Over ten years, the New Jersey Attorney General filed 9 NJFCA cases, compared to 906 filings by relators. Most NJFCA cases were filed in federal court and targeted fraud against Medicaid.
On January 7, 2008, New Jersey joined then 20 other states and the District of Columbia in passing its own civil false claims act. The New Jersey False Claims Act (NJFCA), modeled after the federal False Claims Act, allows whistleblowers (referred to as “relators”) to sue businesses and individuals who submit false or fraudulent claims for payment to the State. In return for filing suit under the NJFCA, successful whistleblowers receive a share of the State’s recovery.
In 2010, New Jersey amended its False Claims Act (NJFCA) to require annual reporting by the State Attorney General to the State Legislature. Each report includes data on new filings and settlements under the NJFCA from the prior year. Specifically, the reports track who is filing suit (the Attorney General or private individuals), the venue (state or federal court), and how much the State netted from settlements under the NJFCA.
Together, these data points provide insight into the statute’s fiscal efficacy. And after a decade of whistleblowing and reporting under the NJFCA, Garden State taxpayers appear to be benefitting from the law.
According to the data, there have been 915 cases filed under the NJFCA since 2010. Of those, the Attorney General filed only 9 cases on its own. Private individuals filed the other 906 cases.
|Calendar Year||Number of cases the |
Attorney General filed
|Number of cases private |
Based on cases no longer under seal, relators strongly favored federal court over state court, with 406 federal court cases compared to just 6 state court cases. Only 19 NJFCA cases appeared to be redundant to other allegations brought under the federal False Claims Act or another state’s False Claims Act.
|Limited to cases no longer under seal|
|Calendar Year||Number filed in state court||Number filed in federal court||Number filed by private individuals who had previously filed an FCA case|
NJFCA lawsuits most often targeted fraud against the Medicaid program, with 405 cases involving Medicaid funds and 17 cases involving other State programs.
|Limited to cases no longer under seal|
|Calendar Year||Number involving Medicaid||Number involving another State Agency|
Based on reported settlements, the Garden State has netted $147 million under the NJFCA since 2010. About $8.8 million went to whistleblowers.
|Limited to cases where the state received a recovery|
|Calendar Year||NJ State Share
(inc. relator fee)
|Relator Share of
|NJ State Share Net|
A decade of data suggests that the NJFCA has produced financial gains for New Jersey. The State’s judicial and prosecutorial investment has been negligible, with private individuals having filed nearly 99% of all NJFCA cases in federal court. Yet the lion’s share of NJFCA recoveries—nearly $150 million over ten years—went to the Garden State. Other states that are considering passing their own False Claims Act should take stock in these numbers.
The individual Attorney General reports under N.J.S.A. § 2A:32C-18 can be found here.
 Marc S. Raspanti & Pamela C. Brecht, The ‘New’ New Jersey False Claims Act: It Was Born to Run, The Legal Intelligencer (July 6-9, 2009), http://www.falseclaimsact.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/born_to_run_article-_msr.pdf.
 N.J.S.A. § 2A:32C-1 through 18.
 Between 15% and 25% of the proceeds if the government intervenes, and 25% to 30% if the government does not intervene. N.J.S.A. § 2A:32C-7.
N.J.S.A. § 2A:32C-18 (P.L.2009, c.265, amending and supplementing P.L.2007, c.265).
 Although filed under the NJFCA, some earlier cases involved misconduct that occurred prior to the NJFCA’s effective date, so the relator did not receive any share of the State’s recovery.