Jul 28, 2015

Lawsuit Against Eric Conn Not Going So Well

     Eric Conn has been accused of defrauding Social Security by many, including a Congressional committee and 60 Minutes. However, Conn's problems really began with a qui tam action. Qui tam is a very odd type of lawsuit. A party, called a relator (not realtor) brings a lawsuit in the name of the government against a person whom they believe is defrauding the government. The government has to review the case to see if they believe it has enough merit that the government should take over the case. If the government declines, the case can still go forward but the relators must bear the burden of proceeding with the case. If the qui tam lawsuit is eventually successful in forcing the defendant to pay damages to the government, the relator gets part of the damages. In Eric Conn's case, the government declined to take over the case. That's a sign that the case being brought by the relator may lack merit, or at least enough merit that damages are likely. In Conn's case, the relators are going forward with the qui tam case, although it seems like the case is proceeding at a glacial pace. The most recent thing that's happened is that the Court has ruled on Conn's motion to dismiss the case. The Court has dismissed most, but not all, of the case. This link will only work for a couple of weeks. I hope it works for Social Security employees. Let me know.
     Many believe that Conn is clearly guilty of fraud. He may be guilty as sin. I don't know. I've written before that to me he seems more like a doofus than a criminal. Fraud is awfully difficult to prove. So far, no criminal charges have been brought against Conn. Social Security has not been able to even suspend Conn from practicing before the agency. This qui tam case may not be going so well for the relators. However, Conn's Social Security practice has almost certainly been ruined, probably permanently. The litigation expenses may well bankrupt him. If you're looking for him to be punished, that may be all you get.


Anonymous said...

*crickets chirping*

Dina Padilla said...

Who would I contact to show that some in the SSA put others and myself on SSI rather than where we should have been on SSDI. We had insured status at the time of our disabilities.
This has been happeneing to a number of of us. I have tried to file a complaint with the SSA but no one in the SSA is wanting to take the complaint and they won't even send me a complaint form through snail mail.
I believe this belongs in a federal prosecutor's office.
Thank you

Anonymous said...

The FBI and OIG were in the Huntington ODAR office week before last interviewing employees about the whole Conn/Daughtery debacle. This coming on the heels of the removal of Glenn Sklar and Jim Borland makes one wonder of the DOJ is finally taking an interest in prosecuting some people. Time will tell.