Legal Opinion

Toepleman v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided January 23, 1959No. Nos. 7321, 7333PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ALBERT V. BRYAN, District Judge.

The Fifth Amendment’s due process clause, contend the appellants, bars recovery of the $164,000 and $60,000 claimed in these two cases, respectively, as the aggregate of forfeitures under the-False Claims Act,* because of the peculiar circumstances here. This statute exacts $2000, aside from damages, from-“every person who makes * * * any claim * * * against the Government of the United States knowing such claim to be false * * * or fraudulent”. The circumstances stressed are the affirmative finding of the trial court in one case-of no “legally recoverable…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Helvering v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. United States Ex Rel. Marcus v. HessSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  3. Rex Trailer Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  4. United States v. McNinchSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  5. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. NYE Schneider Fowler Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. United States v. BornsteinSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Peterson v. WeinbergerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
  3. United States v. Aerodex, Inc., and Hermann Waker, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
  4. United States v. Charles C. Hibbs, and Fairhill Company, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
  5. United States v. Charles HughesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1978

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

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

Powered by the Exa API