County of Kern v. Jadwin
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
YEGAN, J.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc is a Latin phrase “used in logic to describe the fallacy of thinking that a happening which follows another must be its result . . . .” (Webster's New World Dict. (2d College ed. 1989) p. 1113, col. 1.) In other words, the propinquity of two events does not necessarily establish cause and effect. The key word here is “necessarily.” County of Kern (County) argues that its filing of a False Claim Act (FCA; Gov. Code, § 12650 et seq.) against its former employee was not, and is not, a result of the employee’s federal lawsuit against it.1 At oral…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Estate of Bristol v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Santisas v. GoodinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- United States Ex Rel. Vuyyuru v. JadhavCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2009
- People v. RodriguezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Zamos v. StroudCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State ex rel. Standard Elevator Co. v. West Bay Builders, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Clean Energy Fuels Corp. v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Camacho v. JLG IndustriesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2023
- Lincoln v. LopezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
- Universal Home Improvement v. RobertsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.