Legal Opinion

United States v. Health Possibilities, P.S.C.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided March 22, 2000No. 99-5259PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NATHANIEL R. JONES, Circuit Judge.

Raising an issue of first impression in this circuit, this case requires that we determine whether the Attorney General’s consent is required before a private plaintiff may settle or otherwise dismiss an action under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(1). The district court concluded that the consent provisions of the FCA apply only to attempts to dismiss qui tam actions prior to the government’s initial intervention decision, and that when the government affirmatively declines to intervene, a private plaintiff…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Allen v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of DallasSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Keene Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States Ex Rel. SchumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Lori Hoge, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Honda of America Mfg., Inc., Defendant-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
  2. United States Ex Rel. Ritchie v. Lockheed Martin Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
  3. Hoyte v. American National Red CrossCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2008
  4. Ridenour v. Kaiser-Hill Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2005
  5. The Limited, Inc., and Consolidated Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API