United States v. Texas Instruments Corp.

Good Law
104 F.3d 276·41 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,027·97 Daily Journal DAR 147·1997 WL 1676·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 31
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 3, 1997No. 95-56660California476 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kozinski, J.

The False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et. seq., authorizes a private suit against a party that has defrauded the United States. If the suit is successful, the government and the plaintiff (or “relator,” in the language of the Act) divide the proceeds. 31 U.S.C. § 3730 (d). Such suits are known as qui tam actions, from the Latin qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se imposo sequitur, meaning “he who brings the action for the king as well as for himself.”

In United States ex rel. Killingsworth v. Northrop Corp., 25 F.3d 715 (9th Cir.1994), we held that when a False Claims suit is settled rather than adjudicated, the district court is empowered to act “to ensure that the government [receives] its proper share of the settlement.” Id. at 724 . We noted that the language of the Act “authoriz[es] the district court to bar a qui tam plaintiff and defendant from artificially structuring a settlement to deny the government its proper share of the settlement proceeds.” Id. This is so even when the relator conducts the action; “while the government may not obstruct the settlement and force a qui tam plaintiff to continue litigation, [it] nevertheless may question the settlement ... with or…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.