Florida Court Revives Small Business Contract Fraud Suit
Brent Berry and Sean Gose's suit against Native American Services Corp. and Great American Insurance Group Inc. returns to federal court after an appeals ruling.
Updated on Nov. 13, 2026 in Financial Crime
A Florida federal district court is reviving a small business contract fraud suit filed by Brent Berry and Sean Gose against Native American Services Corp. and Great American Insurance Group Inc. The case returns to the court after the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit rejected the district court's conclusion that False Claims Act whistleblowers violate the appointments clause.
Why it matters
The district court had dismissed the suit in 2025 on the basis of its constitutional conclusion about FCA whistleblowers, so the appeals ruling removes that ground for dismissal. The decision affects how False Claims Act whistleblower suits may proceed in Florida's federal courts.
The suit, which was dismissed by a Florida federal district court in 2025, is returning to that court following the Eleventh Circuit's Sept. 1 rejection of the constitutional conclusion behind the dismissal. The merits of the fraud allegations against Native American Services Corp. and Great American Insurance Group Inc. have not yet been addressed.
The players
Native American Services Corp.
Native American Services Corp. is a named defendant in the small business contract fraud suit brought by Brent Berry and Sean Gose.
Great American Insurance Group Inc.
Great American Insurance Group Inc. is a publicly traded insurance company named as a defendant in the Berry and Gose suit.
The details
The suit was filed by Brent Berry and Sean Gose and names Native American Services Corp. and Great American Insurance Group Inc. as defendants. The Eleventh Circuit's ruling came in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates LLC, and it allows the suit to proceed.
Timeline
2025: The district court dismissed the Berry and Gose suit.
Sept. 1: The Eleventh Circuit rejected the district court's constitutional conclusion about FCA whistleblowers.
Legal Context
The revival of this suit follows the Eleventh Circuit's Zafirov decision, which rejected the appointments clause argument used to dismiss False Claims Act whistleblower cases in Florida's federal courts. The ruling restores a pathway for qui tam litigation that the district court had closed.
Small businesses in Florida that hold federal contracts may see whistleblower suits against contractors move forward again following this ruling. The decision means that fraud claims tied to federal contract dealings can continue to be litigated in the state's federal courts.
The takeaway
Businesses that work under federal contracts should understand that False Claims Act whistleblower provisions remain enforceable after this appellate ruling. Anyone with knowledge of contract billing irregularities may consider how these provisions apply to their situation.
Further reading
For related coverage, see Financial Crime reporting from Florida.
