United States Ex Rel. Anthony v. Burke Engineering Co.
District Court, C.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
TAYLOR, District Judge.
The Court holds, on apparent first impression, “the same transaction or occurrence” jurisdiction requirement of the federal False Claims Act (31 U.S.C. § 3732(b)) is broad enough to include a system or scheme of false claims.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff is a former employee of Defendant Burke Engineering Co., a California corporation that sells heating, air conditioning, and refrigeration controls to government entities and other purchasers. Plaintiff contends since 1993 Burke Engineering has sold various items to government employees for…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Bautista v. Los Angeles CountyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Moore v. New York Cotton ExchangeSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Nathaniel MOSLEY Et Al., Appellants, v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION Et Al., AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1974
- Coughlin v. RogersCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- United States v. Sequel Contractors, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2005
- Abbott v. Sodexo Management, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2020
- Anderson v. Sodexo Management, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2020
- Baker v. Sodexo Management, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2020
- Browning v. Sodexo Management, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2020
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.