Legal Opinion

In the Matter of the Enforcement of New Jersey False Claims Act Subpoenas

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 7, 2017No. A-5-16PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Patterson

We affirm the decision of the Appellate Division panel, substantially for the reasons stated in Judge Fisher’s comprehensive opinion, reported at 444 N.J.Super. 566, 572-75, 134 A.3d 1012 (App. Div. 2016). We concur with the panel’s conclusion that the language of the New Jersey False Claims Act (NJFCA), N.J.S.A. 2A:32C-1 to -15, -17 to -18, does not authorize the Attorney General to invoke his or her administrative subpoena power in a given matter after the right to intervene in the qui tam *287action has expired. Id. at 572-73, 134 A.3d 1012 (citing N.J.S.A. 2A:32C-5(g), -6(f), -14(a)). We…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. AIRWORK SER. DIV., ETC. v. Director, Div. of TaxationSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
  2. In the Matter of the Enforcement of New JerseyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2016

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Goldman v. Critter Control of N.J.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API