Legal Opinion
United States of America, Ex Rel. Jason R. Madden v. General Dynamics Corporation, a Delaware Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 14, 1993No. 92-56042PublishedCited by 44 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL, Circuit Judge:
This action was brought by present and former employees of General Dynamics (“Re-lators”) under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3732. General Dynamics Corporation (“General Dynamics”) challenges the district court’s denial of its motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Three issues have been certified for appeal. The first is whether the qui tam provisions of the FCA violate the separation of powers doctrine and the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution. The…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Mistretta v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. Winston Bryant McConneyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Fullilove v. KlutznickSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Bowsher v. SynarSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Communications Workers of America v. BeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- United States Of America, Ex El., Plaintiff v. Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- United States ex rel. Schumer v. Hughes Aircraft Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Cell Therapeutics, Inc. v. Lash Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- United States Ex Rel. Thompson v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1998
- United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Robert P. Aguilar, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.