State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. United States, ex rel Rigsby

U.S. Supreme Court · decided December 6, 2016 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Decided
December 6, 2016
Term
October Term 2016
Vote
8–0
Majority author
Justice Kennedy
Issue area
Economic Activity
Disposition
Affirmed
Outcome
Petitioning party lost
Ideological direction
Liberal

Opinion excerpt

Justice KENNEDY delivered the opinion of the Court. This case addresses the question of the proper remedy when there is a violation of the False Claims Act (FCA) requirement that certain complaints must be sealed for a limited time period. See 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(2). There are two questions presented before this Court. First, do any and all violations of the seal requirement mandate dismissal of a private party's complaint with prejudice? Second, if dismissal is not mandatory, did the District Court here abuse its discretion by declining to dismiss respondents' complaint? I A The FCA imposes civil liability on an individual who, inter alia, "knowingly presents ... a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval" to the Federal Government. § 3729(a)(1)(A). Almost unique to the FCA are its qui tam enforcement provisions, which allow a private party known as a "relator" to bring an FCA action on behalf of the Government. § 3730(b)(1) ; Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States ex rel. Stevens, 529 U.S. 765, 768, n. 1, 120 S.Ct. 1858, 146 L.Ed.2d 836 (2000) (listing three other qui tam statutes). The Attorney General retains the authority to intervene in a relator's ongoing action or to bring an FCA suit in the first instance. §§ 3730(a) -(b). This system is designed to benefit both the relator and the Government. A relator who initiates a meritorious qui tam suit…

Excerpt of a 18,370-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database