Legal Opinion

Harasek v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided September 22, 2018No. Civil Action No. 2017-2017Published

1Opinion of the Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA KATHLEEN A. HARASEK, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 17-2017 (RDM) NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION d/b/a/ AMTRAK, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION This case presents a single issue: Whether Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) is subject to the False Claims Act (“FCA”),

31 U.S.C. § 3729

et seq. Plaintiff Kathleen Harasek, a former Amtrak employee, alleges that her supervisor retaliated against her, in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h), for filing a report with Amtrak’s Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”).…

2Cases cited15 opinions

Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
Connecticut National Bank v. GermainSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
Dolly Kyle Browning and Direct Outstanding Creations Corporation v. William Jefferson ClintonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2002
Kepner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1904

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.