Roger S. Goldman

 
 

Roger S. Goldman retired from Partnership on June 30, 2016. Mr. Goldman practiced law with the firm since 1981. His practice centered on False Claims Act and white collar criminal litigation with an emphasis on healthcare fraud defense. He has handled numerous qui tam proceedings, congressional investigations and grand jury investigations, representing a host of major healthcare corporations, government contractors and telecommunications firms. Mr. Goldman is regularly cited as a leading attorney by Chambers USA for the District of Columbia: Healthcare category. He is consistently recognized in the Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers list and recommended by The Legal 500 US. He is also named one of the “Best Lawyers in America” in healthcare law by Best Lawyers 2014.

Mr. Goldman has played a principal role in the defense of a number of high-profile healthcare fraud investigations on behalf of clients such as Tenet Healthcare and HCA. He has also successfully litigated to resolution false claims act cases for clients such as National Semiconductor Corporation and Royco, Inc. 

In November 2006, Mr. Goldman was named Corporate Partner of the Year by New York City Habitat for Humanity at their 7th Annual Builder Awards Gala. He has served as Chairman on the Qui Tam Monograph project for the ABA Public Contracts section, Procurement Fraud Committee in 1994. He is the Co-founder and President of Buildable Hours, Inc., a national organization that assembles groups of law firms to build homes with Habitat for Humanity International. As a member of Latham's Pro Bono Committee, Mr. Goldman actively participates in the administration of Latham's extensive pro bono program.

Prior to entering the practice of law, Mr. Goldman served as a law clerk to Judge Dorothy W. Nelson of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1980-1981).

Mr. Goldman’s recent publications include:

  • “The Real Good News from GEICO: Reasonable Interpretations Negate Scienter Under the False Claims Act” (Government Contract, November 2007)
  • “Stark Naked: The Open Letter Disrobes the Fundamental Flaw in the Tainted Claims Theory of Damages in FCA Cases Based on Stark,” (presented at the ABA 6th Annual National Institute on Civil False Claims Act and Qui Tam Enforcement, May 17-19 2006)
  • “Twice the Usual Number of Suspects: Preemption of Common Law Recoupment Claims in Medicare Actions Brought Under the False Claims Act,” (presented at the ABA Health Care Fraud 2004 Conference, May 2004)
  • “Round Up the Usual Suspects: Use of Common Law Recoupment Claims in Medicare Actions Brought Under the Federal False Claims Act,” (presented at the ABA 4th Annual National Institute on the Civil False Claims Act and Qui Tam Enforcement, January 29-31, 2003)
  • “T'ain’t that Easy: Bearing the Burden in False Claims Act Cases,” (presented at the ABA 3rd Annual National Institute on the Civil False Claims Act and Qui Tam Enforcement, November 28-30, 2001)
  • “It's Not That Easy: Why Extrapolation is Inappropriate in the False Claims Act Context,” (presented at the AICPA National Conference, October 2-3, 2001)
  • “Tilting at Windfalls: Rejecting the Tainted Claims Theory of Damages in False Claims Act Cases,” (presented at the ABA Health Care Fraud 2001 Conference, May 2001)
  • “Is There Any ‘There’ There: Damages and Penalties in False Claims Act Cases Based on Antikickback and Stark Violations” (prepared for the Georgetown Federal Enforcement Seminar, February, 2000)
 
  • Bar Qualification
    • District of Columbia
    • Utah
    Education
    • JD, University of Virginia School of Law, 1980
      Order of the Coif
    • BA, University of Virginia, 1977
 
 
Notice: We appreciate your interest in Latham & Watkins. If your inquiry relates to a legal matter and you are not already a current client of the firm, please do not transmit any confidential information to us. Before taking on a representation, we must determine whether we are in a position to assist you and agree on the terms and conditions of engagement with you. Until we have completed such steps, we will not be deemed to have a lawyer-client relationship with you, and will have no duty to keep confidential the information we receive from you. Thank you for your understanding.