Legal Opinion
US DEPT. OF HUD EX REL. GIVLER v. Smith
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided September 19, 1991No. Civ.A. 89-0647PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CAHN, District Judge.
In this qui tam 1 action, the plaintiff is suing on behalf of the United States of America (“the Government” or “the United States”), pursuant to the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq. (“FCA” or “the Act”), to recover statutory penalties for fraud committed against the United States. Defendant Buckl and Jankowski (“Buckl” or “the defendant”) 2 has moved to dismiss the complaint on the basis that the qui tam sections of the Act are unconstitutional. 3 In the alternative, the defendant asserts that the complaint should be dismissed because the plaintiff has…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- United States of America, Ex Rel. Kreindler & Kreindler, Cross-Appellee v. United Technologies Corporation, Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- United States of America, Ex Rel. Kevin G. Kelly v. The Boeing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Newman v. Checkrite California, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 1995
- United States Ex Rel. Amin v. George Washington UniversityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1998
- Kaliner v. Load Rite Trailers, Inc. (In Re Sverica Acquisition Corp.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1995
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.