UNITED STATES ex rel. IRWIN EISENSTEIN v. CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK, et al. (556 U.S. 928)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 8, 2009 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 556 U.S. 928 · 129 S. Ct. 2230
- Decided
- June 8, 2009
- Term
- October Term 2008
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Thomas
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court. The question presented is whether the 30-day time limit to file a notice of appeal in Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(A) or the 60-day time limit in Rule 4(a)(1)(B) applies when the United States declines to formally intervene in a qui tarn action brought under the False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U. S. C. § 3729. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the 30-day limit applies. We affirm. I Petitioner Irwin Eisenstein and four New York City (City) employees filed this lawsuit against the City to challenge a fee charged by the City to nonresident workers. They contended, inter alia, that the City deprived the United States of tax revenue that it otherwise would have received if the fee had not been deducted as an expense from the workers’ taxable income. In their view, this violated the FCA, which creates civil liability for “[a]ny person who . . . knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, to an officer or employee of the United States Government... a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval.” § 3729(a)(1). Although the United States is a “real party in interest” in a case brought under the FCA, Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 17(a), an FCA action does not need to be brought by the United States. The FCA also allows “[a] person [to] bring a civil action for a violation of section 3729 for…
Excerpt of a 16,877-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.