United States v. United Technologies Corp.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
THOMAS M. ROSE, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This action is before the Court on remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. After a bench trial, this Court rejected Defendant United Technologies Corporation’s assertion of a statute of limitations defense and found it liable on the United States’ claims arising under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1) & (2), (“FCA”). The Court found, inter alia, that United Technologies’ predecessor in interest, Pratt and Whitney (“Pratt”), violated the False Claims Act by fraudulently…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- United States Ex Rel. Marcus v. HessSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Northrop Corp. v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- United States v. Commodities Trading Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. United Technologies Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015
- United States v. United Technologies Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2016