Legal Opinion
United States Ex Rel. Radcliffe v. Purdue Pharma L.P.
District Court, W.D. Virginia
Decided October 14, 2008No. 1:05CV00089PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JAMES P. JONES, Chief District Judge.
In this qui tam action, the defendants have moved to dismiss on several grounds, including the jurisdictional bar based on prior public disclosures of the alleged false claims, the execution of a pre-filing general release by the relator, and a failure to plead fraud with particularity under Rule 9(b). For the reasons set forth below, I deny the former two grounds of dismissal, but I will grant the motion under Rule 9(b), with leave to amend. 1
I. BackgRound.
In this action brought under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. Kimbell Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Edwin P. Harrison, and United States of America, Party in Interest v. Westinghouse Savannah River CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1999
- Adams v. BainCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1982
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Grayson v. AT & T CORP.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- United States Ex Rel. Green v. Service Contract Education & Training Trust FundDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- United States v. Purdue Pharma L.P.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2010
- United States Ex Rel. Davis v. PrinceDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2011
- United States ex rel. Colquitt v. Abbott LaboratoriesDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2012
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.