Legal Opinion
Veridyne Corporation v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided July 15, 2014No. 2013-5011, 2013-5012PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DYK, Circuit Judge.
Veridyne Corporation (“Veridyne”) sued to recover on its contract with the government. The Court of Federal Claims (“Claims Court”) held that Veridyne’s contract claim was forfeited under the Forfeiture of Fraudulent Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2514, also known as the Special Plea in Fraud Statute, but awarded Veridyne partial recovery under a quantum meruit theory. The government appeals the quantum meruit award. The Claims Court also awarded penalties to the government under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729, and the antifraud provision of the Contract Disputes Act, 41…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Marcus v. HessSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- United States v. BornsteinSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States of America, Ex Rel. James M. Hagood v. Sonoma County Water Agency, James M. Hagood v. Sonoma County Water AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Schindler Elevator Corp. v. United States ex rel. KirkSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- United States Ex Rel. Ubl v. IIF Data SolutionsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2011
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Rda Construction Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
- E & E Enterprises Global, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Mw Builders, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
- Horn & Associates, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Oasis International Waters, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.