UNITED STATES EX REL. OSTRAGER ET AL.
v.
NEW ORLEANS CHAPTER, ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS, INC. ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Court held that the petitioner's qui tam action was not barred by the prior criminal fines paid by the respondents.
Petitioner brought a qui tam action under federal statutes alleging respondents submitted fraudulent bids on a federally funded hospital project, caus…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Qui Tam Action cases and more on FLexlaw
Mr. Justice Black delivered the opinion of the Court. •
This action is substantially similar to that in United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, ante, p. 537. Eelying on § § 5438 and 3490-93, Eevised Statutes, the petitioner charges that the respondents caused the government $7,620 damages by submitting fraudulent collusive bids on a hospital constructed with Federal Public Works Administration financial assistance. The petitioner in a qui tarn action asks double damages plus $2,000 from each of seventeen respondents. The respondents had previously been indiqted by the United States government in a criminal action and had paid fines totalling $5,000.
The respondents answered on the merits, made other pleadings not relevant at this stage of the case, and offered two special defenses: that the action placed them in double jeopardy in violation of the Fifth Amendment and that the statutes involved did not provide a basis for such a cause of action. The District Court, without reaching the merits, dismissed the complaint on the theory of double jeopardy. The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the complaint but rested its conclusion on the belief that no claim against the United States was involved since the United States was not a party to the contract. It relied heavily on the Hess case as decided by the Circuit Court.
For the reasons set forth in our opinion in the Hess case, we believe that the decision below should be reversed.
Reversed.
Mr. Justice Frankfurter joins in this opinion but concurs on the question of double jeopardy for the reasons set forth in his opinion in United States ex rei. Marcus v. Hess, ante, p. 537. Mr. Justice Jackson dissents for the reasons set forth in his opinion in the same case.
Mr. Justice Murphy to,ok no part in the consideration or disposition of this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Grannis, 172 F.2d 507 (4th Cir. 1949)…ense of double jeopardy is not applicable in civil actions under the federal false claims statute, United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S. 537, 548, 552, 63 S.Ct. 379, 87 L.Ed. 443; United .States ex rel. Ostrager v. New Orleans Chapter, &c., 317 U.S. 562, 63 S.Ct. 393, 87 L.Ed. 458. The judge himself held this view of the law but nevertheless permitted the jury to be told of the acquittal of the defendants in the criminal case. He attempted to cure the prejudicial effect of this action by tell [*512…
-
United States v. Cochran, 235 F.2d 131 (5th Cir. 1956)…appellee’s claim of double jeopardy is without substance. United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, supra, 317 U.S. at page 548 et seq., 63 S.Ct. at page 386 et seq.; United States ex rel. Ostrager v. New Orleans Chapter, Associated General Contractors, 317 U.S. 562, 563, 63 S.Ct. 393, 87 L.Ed. 458; United States v. Grannis, 4 Cir., 172 F. 2d 507, 511. . Indeed the credit insurance constitutes intangible property. Burnet v. Wells, 289 U.S. 670, 679, 53 S.Ct. 761, 77 L.Ed. 1439; Vance on Insurance (2nd ed.), §…1 / 2