Legal Opinion
United States Ex Rel. Mikes v. Straus
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 26, 1994No. 92 Civ. 2754 (VLB)PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ORDER
VINCENT L. BRODERICK, District Judge.
I
This ease presents questions relating to the federal “Qui Tam” statute (31 U.S.C. § 3730). In particular the issues raise here include (1) the degree of specificity required for private suits against government contractors brought by current or former employees and similar parties where the United States has declined to proceed, and (2) the circumstances under which such “Qui Tam” suits can be combined with claims under state “whistleblower” protection provisions.
This suit was brought by plaintiff Patricia S. Mikes 1 under the federal Qui…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination UnitSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- United States v. ClassicSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Lingle v. Norge Division of Magic Chef, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. CoyneSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Mikes v. StrausCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Mikes v. StrausCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Norman I. Gold v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., Black River Constructors, Fort Drum Constructors, and National Structures, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Reddington v. Staten Island University HospitalCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Mikes v. StraussDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1995
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.