Dallas Oil & Refining Co. v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• applying federal common law to determine successor liability in a False Claims Act case
• dismissing FCA claims because “[r]elators have not alleged facts demonstrating that the certifying physician did not or could not have believed, based on his or her clinical judgment, that the patient was eligible for hospice care”
• “Illinois courts interpreting the state act look to interpretations of the similarly worded federal FCA.”
• allegations that successor company’s officer knew of misconduct at predecessor company supported finding notice on a motion to dismiss
• despite lack of allegations regarding actual submission of claims to government, court could reasonably infer that defendants had submitted fraudulent bills to the government based on alleged practice
• court’s reasoning on false claim under Federal False Claims Act applied equally to state act, because “Illinois courts interpreting the state act look to interpretations of the similarly worded federal [act]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).