Legal Opinion
United States v. United Technologies, Corp.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided June 7, 1999No. 5:92-cv-00375PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ELLEN B. BURNS, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff, United States of America, has brought this action against Defendant, United Technologies Corporation, Sikorsky Aircraft Division (“Sikorsky”), alleging violations of the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 (“FCA”), and the Truth-in-Negotiations Act, 10 U.S.C. § 2306a (“TINA”). The government also seeks damages under the common law causes of action of payment by mistake and unjust enrichment.
In its amended complaint, the government alleges that Sikorsky submitted false cost or pricing data to the Navy during negotiations and provided a…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States of America, Ex Rel. Kreindler & Kreindler, Cross-Appellee v. United Technologies Corporation, Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- 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
- United States v. Aerodex, Inc., and Hermann Waker, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- United States v. Lennard L. MeadCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
- Providence Electric Co. v. Sutton Place, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Miller v. HolzmannDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- United States v. Science Applications International Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- United States Ex Rel. Campbell v. Lockheed Martin Corp.District Court, M.D. Florida · 2003
- Edalati v. SabharwalDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2023