- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Government Relations
- Health Care
- Intellectual Property, Entertainment, and Technology Protection
- Appellate Practice
- Business and Commercial
- Class Actions
- Consumer Lending and Lender Liability
- Corporate Takeovers and Changes of Control
- Environmental and Natural Resources
- ERISA Litigation
- False Claims Act and Qui Tam
- Financial Institutions Litigation
- Government Enforcement and Internal Investigations
- Health Care Litigation
- Intellectual Property
- Trust and Estate Litigation
- White Collar Defense
- The George Washington University Law School, J.D., 1972, cum laude, Order of the Coif
- Denison University, B.A., 1969, magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa
Bar & Court Admissions
- District of Columbia
- U.S. Supreme Court
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Glenn is a partner in the Vorys Cincinnati office and a member of the litigation group. He practices general litigation with an emphasis on the representation of individuals and corporations in complex civil litigation and criminal proceedings. His work has focused on qui tam and false claims litigation, patent litigation, class actions, business litigation, health care fraud and abuse, government procurement, environmental and toxic tort litigation.
Career highlights include:
- Successfully trying complex False Claims Act cases
- 40 years of trial experience in complex cases ranging from white collar criminal prosecutions to securities fraud to patent litigation to trade secret litigation and contract breaches
- Serving as Special Litigation Counsel for the Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch of the United States Department of Justice
- Successfully representing the federal government while with the United States Department of Justice, in many highly publicized actions, including the Karen Silkwood case, the Nixon tapes case, and two separate proceedings against former CIA agents
- Successfully represented client in a unanimous United States Supreme Court decision, Allison Engine Co., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Sanders, narrowing the scope of liability under the federal False Claims Act
Glenn is a member of the American Bar Association, the District of Columbia Bar, the Ohio State Bar Association, and the Cincinnati Bar Association. He is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates, Emeritus Master of the Bench of the Potter Stewart Inn of Court.
Glenn is an adjunct professor of trial practice at the University of Cincinnati College of Law. He has taught trial practice for the National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA). Glenn has made numerous presentations on False Claims Act and qui tam litigation.
Glenn received his J.D. cum laude from The George Washington University Law School, where he was a member of the Order of the Coif. He received his B.A. magna cum laude from Denison University, where he was Phi Beta Kappa.
Professional and Community Activities
- The American College of Trial Lawyers, State Committee, 2005-2009
Honors & Awards
- Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers since 1992
- Leading Lawyer in Business Litigation, Cincy Magazine, 2009-2014
- The Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation, 2006-2016
- The Best Lawyers in America, Personal Injury Litigation, 1987-2016
- The Best Lawyers in America, Business Litigation, 1987-2008
- The Best Lawyers in America, White-Collar Criminal Defense, 2006-2016
- The Best Lawyers in America, Criminal Defense, 1991-2008
- The Best Lawyers in America, “Bet-the-Company” Litigation, 2008-2016
- The Best Lawyers in America, Qui Tam Law, 2015-2016
- The Best Lawyers in America, Cincinnati Personal Injury Litigation - Lawyer of the Year, 2012
- Chambers and Partners, Leading Lawyer in Litigation: General Commercial, 2007-2015
- Chambers and Partners, Leading Lawyer in Litigation: White-Collar Crime and Government Investigations, 2004-2015
- Ohio Super Lawyers, Top 100 Super Lawyers in Ohio, 2009-2015
- Ohio Super Lawyers, Top 50 Cincinnati Area Super Lawyers, 2004-2015
- Ohio Super Lawyers, Business Litigation, 2004-2016
- Martindale-Hubbell AV Peer Review Rated
- 12/2/2015Vorys is pleased to announce that 63 attorneys from the firm have been named 2016 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars.
- 8/17/2015One-hundred and eighteen lawyers from Vorys were recently selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2016.
- 5/19/2015Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease is pleased to announce that 39 of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized among the leading practitioners in the country in the 2015 edition of Chambers USA.
- 12/3/2014Vorys is pleased to announce that 74 attorneys from the firm have been named 2015 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars.
- 11/11/2014Glenn Whitaker, a partner in the Cincinnati office and a member of the litigation group, was quoted in an article included in the November 10, 2014 edition of the Westlaw Journal: Government Contract.
- 8/18/2014One-hundred and ten lawyers from Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease were recently selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2015.
- 5/23/2014Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease is pleased to announce that 39 of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized among the leading practitioners in the country in the 2014 edition of Chambers USA.
- 2/10/2014Whitaker Quoted in Columbia Daily Tribune Story Titled “Lawsuit Over Bluebird Network’s Use of Stimulus Funds May Go To Trial Soon”Glenn Whitaker, a partner in the Vorys Cincinnati office and a member of the litigation group, was quoted in a Columbia Daily Tribune story on a False Claims Act (FCA) case in Missouri.
- 2/3/2014Vorys is proud to announce nine attorneys from the Cincinnati office have been named “2014 Leading Lawyers” by Cincy Magazine.
- 12/4/2013Eighty-one attorneys from Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP have been named 2014 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars. 57 Vorys attorneys were named 2014 Ohio Super Lawyer and 24 Vorys attorneys were named 2014 Ohio Rising Stars.
- 8/14/2013One hundred and eleven lawyers from Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease were recently selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2014.
- 5/24/2013Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease is pleased to announce that 39 of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized among the leading practitioners in the country in the 2013 edition of Chambers USA. Chambers USA conducts in-depth research and ranks the leading firms and attorneys in an extensive range of practice areas throughout America.
- 5/7/2013Whitaker Quoted in Cincinnati Business Courier Story, “A Deeper Look at What Could Happen in Chemed's Federal Lawsuit”Glenn Whitaker, a partner in the Vorys Cincinnati office and member of the litigation group, was quoted in a Cincinnati Business Courier story about a False Claims Act case filed against Chemed.
- 5/3/2013Glenn Whitaker, a partner in the Vorys Cincinnati office and member of the litigation group, was quoted in a Cincinnati Enquirer story titled “U.S. accuses Chemed subsidiaries of bilking Medicare.”
- 2/1/2013Vorys announced that nine attorneys from the firm's Cincinnati office have been named “2013 Leading Lawyers” by Cincy Magazine. The Leading Lawyers survey is conducted annually by the magazine. Winners are nominated by colleagues outside their firm and chosen by a panel of their peers.
- 12/17/2012Seventy-Seven attorneys from Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease have been named 2013 Ohio Super Lawyers and Rising Stars.
- 8/23/2012One hundred and twenty-six lawyers from Vorys were recently selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2013.
- 6/7/2012Vorys announced that 35 of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized among the leading practitioners in the country in the 2012 edition of Chambers USA.
- 3/16/2012Vorys’ partners Glenn Whitaker and Michael Bronson were featured in a Cincinnati Business Courier story titled “Whistle-blowers push False Claims suits to record.”
- 2/1/2012Vorys announced that nine attorneys from the firm's Cincinnati office have been named “2012 Leading Lawyers” by Cincy Magazine.
- 1/31/2012The Vorys False Claims Act practice has been selected as a Government Contracts Practice Group of the Year by Law360. Law360 editors selected the national practice groups of the year from submissions by more than 500 law firms.
- 8/12/2015Whistleblower Defense Alert: D.C. Circuit Upholds Assertion of Privilege as to Internal Investigation Documents in FCA SuitOn Tuesday, August 11, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit released a decision upholding an assertion of privilege by Kellogg Brown and Root, Inc. (KBR) over internal investigation documents in a FCA suit alleging kickbacks and overbilling on Iraq war subcontracts.
- 8/3/2015Whistleblower Defense Alert: Three Questions Every FCA Defendant Should Ask To Evaluate Whether Claim Preclusion Can Fill The Gap Created By The Supreme Court’s Interpretation Of The First-To-File RuleA decision last week in an FCA case in Pennsylvania confirms that the FCA’s first-to-file bar has been weakened. See U.S. ex rel. Boise v. Cephalon, Inc., No. 08-CV-287 (E.D. Pa.). The court in the Cephalon case confirmed that the Supreme Court’s decision in Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter means that the first-to-file bar does not apply when a previously filed case is no longer pending.
- 7/20/2015The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in U.S. ex rel. Hartpence v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., 2015 U.S. App. Lexis 11643 (9th. Cir. July 7, 2015), overruled existing Ninth Circuit precedent regarding the requirements for meeting the public disclosure rule’s original source exception, weakening the public disclosure bar in the Ninth Circuit and opening the door for increased qui tam activity within that jurisdiction.
- 5/26/2015Whistleblower Defense Alert: Sixth Circuit Reaffirms Fair Market Value As Proper Measure of Damages, Vacates FCA Award of $657 Million to the GovernmentLast month, the Sixth Circuit reaffirmed the fair market value (FMV) standard as the primary measure of damages in False Claims Act (FCA) cases—and demonstrated the teeth of that requirement when evidence (including expert testimony) is not presented to support an FMV determination. United States v. United Technologies Corp., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5476 (6th Cir. April 6, 2015), represented the culmination of a decades-long dispute between the government and United Technologies’ Pratt & Whitney unit over pricing for engines supplied to the Air Force for use in its F-15 and F-16 aircraft.
- 5/26/2015Whistleblower Defense Alert: Supreme Court Holds the WSLA Does Not Apply to the Civil FCA But Limits the Scope of the First-to-File BarToday the Supreme Court issued its decision in Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter. On the first question presented, the Court held that the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (WSLA) applies only to criminal offenses and thus does not toll the False Claims Act’s (FCA) statute of limitations indefinitely while the United States is in armed conflict.
- 2/12/2015Courts continue to whittle away at the public disclosure bar, historically one of the best ways to dispose of parasitic qui tam lawsuits. Most recently, the Eleventh Circuit issued a ruling regarding the impact of the 2010 amendments to the False Claims Act’s (FCA) public disclosure rule. In its opinion in U.S. ex rel. Osheroff v. Humana, Inc., the Eleventh Circuitjoined the Fourth Circuit in holding that the public disclosure rule, as amended in 2010, is no longer a jurisdictional bar to an FCA action. Instead, under the amended version of the statute, defendants now must move to dismiss allegations that have been publicly disclosed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
- 2/5/2015Whistleblower Defense Alert: Sixth Circuit Affirms Importance of Government Witnesses in Materiality AnalysisA recent Sixth Circuit opinion provides defendants a valuable roadmap for using government witness testimony to defeat False Claims Act (FCA) claims on materiality grounds at the summary judgment stage. In U.S. ex rel. American Systems Consulting, Inc. v. ManTech Advanced Systems Int’l Inc., Case No. 14-3269 (6th Cir.), the court rejected the relator’s argument that materiality decisions should be left to a jury. Instead, the court expressly held that “a judge may decide as a matter of law whether a misrepresentation was material under the FCA.”
- 1/14/2015Whistleblower Defense Alert: Fourth Circuit’s Opinion Shows Influence of Government’s Decision to Intervene on Court’s Determination of MaterialityOn January 8, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reinstated the government’s False Claims Act (FCA) claims in United States v. Triple Canopy, Inc., No. 13-2190. In reversing the district court’s dismissal of the government’s case, the Fourth Circuit highlighted, both explicitly and implicitly, the importance of the government’s decision to intervene in the case.
- 1/9/2015Whistleblower Defense Alert: District Court Imposes $1.6 Million Sanction Against Relators for Violating the FCA SealEarlier this week, Judge Amy Totenberg of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia imposed significant monetary sanctions against a pair of relators who blatantly and repeatedly violated the seal order in a pending qui tam action, United States ex rel. Bibby v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Case No. 1:06-CV-0547-AT.
- 12/5/2014Whistleblower Defense Alert: Department of Justice Announces Third Straight Year of Record-Breaking False Claims Act RecoveriesAccording to a recent Department of Justice press release regarding annual False Claims Act (FCA) recoveries, FCA recoveries continue to skyrocket, in keeping with the trend in recent years. 2014 marks the third straight year in which the Department of Justice has announced a record-setting annual recovery.
- 10/16/2014Whistleblower Defense Alert: Court Finds Relator Ill-Suited To Question Federal Agency’s Judgment, Tosses Qui Tam SuitLast week, the District of Kansas granted summary judgment to Boeing in U.S. ex rel. Smith v. The Boeing Company, Case No. 05-10730MLB (D. Kan.), a False Claims Act case in which the qui tam relators effectively tried to second-guess the professional judgment of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
- 7/2/2014Whistleblower Defense Alert: D.C. Circuit Grants Writ of Mandamus and Protects Privilege of Internal Corporate InvestigationsLast week, the D.C. Circuit provided good news to defense contractors, health care providers and all other corporate entities doing business with the government. In a forceful opinion, the court overruled a trial court decision that portended disastrous consequences for privileged internal investigations by corporate legal departments.
- 7/1/2014Whistleblower Defense Alert: The Supreme Court Will Review Fourth Circuit Decision that Weakened the False Claims Act’s Statute of Limitations and First-to-File BarToday, the Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari in Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter. The petition presented two questions: (1) whether the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (WSLA) applies to claims of civil fraud brought by qui tam relators, and (2) whether the False Claims Act’s (FCA) first-to-file rule is an absolute bar or whether it permits subsequent actions so long as the first-filed action had been dismissed on non-merits grounds prior to filing of the subsequent action.
- 6/2/2014Whistleblower Defense Alert: Defeating a Whistleblower’s Cursory Allegations of Scienter in FCA Cases Involving a Defendant’s Good Faith Interpretation of a Regulation or ContractA recent decision dismissing a whistleblower’s complaint with prejudice is good news for companies facing a False Claims Act (FCA) case that turns on the interpretation of a regulation or contractual provision. In U.S. ex rel. Thompson v. Honeywell Int’l, Inc., Case No. CV 12-2214-JAK (C.D. Cal.), the court articulated a clear and defendant-friendly formulation of the pleading standard for scienter in such cases.
- 6/2/2014On June 2, 2014, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in the case of Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc. (Case No. 12-786), that will have the immediate impact of limiting liability for inducement to infringe under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) where no party is liable for direct infringement under §271(a). In at least the short-term future, defendants accused in a patent suit of inducing infringement of a method claim, where no one party has performed or controlled the performance of all steps of the method, should have a solid basis for seeking dismissal of that suit for failure to state a cause of action.
- 4/28/2014Qui tam relators and the Department of Justice continually push the FCA envelope with implied certification cases. A recent case from the District of Massachusetts, U.S. ex rel. Julio Escobar, et al. v. Universal Health Services, Inc., illustrates how FCA plaintiffs try to use this theory to shoehorn non-fraudulent regulatory non-compliances into FCA violations—and how to beat such claims.
- 3/27/2014Whistleblower Defense Client Alert: Using Government Witnesses to Obtain Summary Judgment on a Qui Tam Relator’s FCA ClaimsA recent False Claims Act decision serves as an important reminder that although qui tam relators may “stand in the shoes” of the government for purposes of bringing a lawsuit, they are not entitled to substitute their judgment for that of key government decision-makers to avoid summary judgment.
- 2/5/2014Whistleblower Defense Client Alert: What Government Contractors Should Know About Fraud-In-The-Inducement CasesA recent holding from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania contains some helpful analysis for defendants facing a fraud-in-the inducement False Claims Act (FCA) case. A fraud-in-the-inducement case is a rare sub-species of FCA cases, with different rules. Unlike a traditional FCA case, there is nothing “false,” factually or legally, on the face of the claims for payment at issue in a fraud-in-the inducement case. Instead, the otherwise unobjectionable claims are false by virtue of the fact that they were submitted under a contract that was procured through the use of false statements.
- 1/27/2014Whistleblower Defense Client Alert - Fourth Circuit: Amended Public Disclosure Bar No Longer JurisdictionalRecently, the Fourth Circuit became the first court of appeals to address whether the public disclosure bar, as amended in 2010 by the Affordable Care Act, remains a jurisdictional defense to False Claims Act allegations. The opinion in U.S. ex rel. Radcliffe v. Purdue Pharma L.P. is significant because the district courts are divided on whether the public disclosure bar remains jurisdictional after the amendment.
- 3/4/2013U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. recently granted a motion to dismiss qui tam claims from two relators who alleged that Lockheed Martin violated the False Claims Act by inflating the reported number of hours its employees worked on government contracts.
- 3/20/2012Glenn Whitaker and Whitney Gibson, attorneys in the firm’s Cincinnati office, co-authored a column titled “A Guide To Preventing False Claims Act Litigation” for Law360.